If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
There are many great evenings of wine happening every day all across this world of ours. Many great wines opened up on a weekly basis at organized tastings, dinners with friends or even home alone. Then there are the nights when legends are made, or history is continued, when a group of people experience so many significant wines that it becomes a reference point for all of winekind.
On December 11th, 2009, Mr. Robert A. Rosania, aka Big Boy, summoned some of his closest friends together in the private room at CRU for an evening that he called, ‘The Virgin Palate Dinner.’ The idea was to have wines that no one has ever had before, i.e., all of our palates would be virgins for any wines opened on this night. Champagne was included, of course, as Champagne is technically a sparkling wine for those that forget. Everyone was welcome to bring wine themselves, although it wasn’t required. Sir Robert Bohr did a masterful job receiving everyone’s bottles in advance, coordinating the flights and overseeing the wine service all night long, which was quite a task. Of course, there was a wine here and there which some had already tasted, especially me :), but the mission was for the most part accomplished, as most wines were never had before by most guests.
While this night is almost embarrassing due to the incredible amount of rare wines experienced, I was there, and it happened, and that’s really nothing to be ashamed of. Now that I have gotten that out of the way, let’s get on to the wines….
We started with, of course, Champagne. We received an early clue, ‘pre 1945.’ King Angry said, ‘I’d be shocked if this was from the ‘20s.’ It wasn’t. It had a bready and yeasty nose, with hints of oil, wet wool and limestone. The palate was in the dry fino direction, but it wasn’t oxidized. Nice citrus and white chocolate flavors got brighter in the glass. It was a bit tangy with lots of apple cider on its finish, which had very little bubble left to it. It did make up for that by gaining in its caramel and flesh components. It was a 1943 Krug; no one really had a consensus about how this vintage was, as there was so little wine made due to the war (91M).
The second bubbly was courtesy of the King, and it was much cleaner and fresher, with delicate wintry vanilla aromas. There was also nice dry hay and straw aromas, and hints of half ‘n half. The palate was round, delicate and deft with pleasant, light yellow hues. Wendy observed, ‘high acidity,’ and her other half, Gentleman Jim, noted, ‘delicate fizz and some still-wine character with the frizzante on the back.’ It was a late-disgorged 1941 Mumm’s Cordon Rouge, disgorged sometime in the ‘80s or ‘90s per Ray. It was excellent (93).
The third wine of this ‘warm-up’ flight was very mature in the nose, showing lots of honey and some oxidation. Big Boy was ready to write it off at first, but he came back to it in a few minutes and changed his tune. I liked its cereal aromas, and its palate was sweet and wine-like. Sir Robert Bohr also stood up for its ‘texture and viscosity.’ It was a 1928 Pol Roger, still enjoyable but definitely affected, and it held really well in the glass for something so old (94A).
‘The next flight will never be repeated again in world history,’ Big Boy pronounced. We would soon find out that it was three vintages of the same wine. The first Champagne Ray asserted was ‘the oldest wine served so far.’ Big Boy told him it wasn’t, which meant we knew it was 1928 or younger. That helped :). Neil Diamonds said, ‘you can put it on your pancakes,’ and it did have a very maple syrupy nose. It was wine-like on its palate and deliciously Madeira in its flavor profile, a fact Sir Robert seconded. We were told it was an obscure vintage, and even though it was more of an after-dinner drink than a Champagne, I still liked the rich, round and sweet qualities of the 1939 Philipponat Clos Des Goisses (93A).
The 1945 Philipponat Clos Des Goisses was ‘spectacular’ per Rob, and I pegged ‘Proscuitto Crudo’ in the nose with a little bit of his help. There was also vanilla cream in this rich yet smooth, elegant and beautiful Champagne. It was long and refined, and an original disgorgement bottling, making it all the rarer. There were some garden flavors, along with warm and tender yellow fruit ones. This was gorgeous stuff (95).
The 1955 Philipponat Clos Des Goisses rounded out this flight in fine fashion, although it was not as fine as the 1945. It was another great nose, more wafery and with hints of vanilla, wheat and musk. There was more force in the ’55. Its acidity seemingly popped out of sweet, bread custard pie flavors. It, too, was long and tender, possessing nice richness and admirable definition (94).
The next flight will probably never be repeated again in world history, either. The first Champagne had a mature, fino nose. The palate was sweet but morning mouthy. Big Boy pontificated, ‘this is never breathe again land, but unfortunately, this is close to not breathing,’ meaning it was incredibly rare but also not a perfect bottle, closer to dead than alive. It was sweet, round and lush in the mouth, and I could drink it, so it wasn’t shot, but there was definitely no acidity left.
Gentleman Jim picked up on ‘baklava’ qualities, which I saw. It was a 1929 Salon. I can only dream of what a perfect bottle must taste like (91A).
The next bubbly in this flight had hints of apple in the nose, orchard fresh, along with cinnamon brown sugar. The palate was rich, long and classic, with nice balance of brown and white fruit flavors. There was nice sprite to its lingering finish. It was a 1942 Salon. Now that’s more like it (96).
Sensing a theme? The third wine would continue this theme, although with an asterisk. It was nuttier in the nose, with hints of caramel. Big Mike had just joined us, on cue about an hour into the program, and he wondered if this bottle was a little off. I liked it, but the nose did have a hint of ‘turn’ to it. The palate still had plenty of stuffing, with flavors of golden raisin but also some definite stew. We were told that this Champagne had no dosage. What could it be? It was the proverbial needle in the wine stack, a rarer than rare 1945 Salon ‘Nature,’ which had the ‘same price as a case of ’59,’ Rob insisted. The ‘Nature’ designation was what meant no dosage. ‘A perfect bottle would shatter everything,’ he continued, but unfortunately, this bottle was not perfect, but still impressive (94A).
The 1949 Salon that closed out this special flight had an exotic nose full of creamy apricot jam and root beer/sarsaparilla. Its flavors were drier, its acidity nice and its finish long. Cream soda flavors emerged out of its arid palate, but dryness was the theme in this wheaty and excellent wine (94).
Time for a new flight and three more Champagnes. I could get used to this. The first had a sweet, buttery nose, almost like caramel liqueur but more nutty. Big Boy hailed it as ‘mature but enormous.’ He definitely wasn’t talking about himself there, for a change :). The palate was rich, oily and complete, with big volume and powerful acidity. It was absolutely delicious, and it was 1920 Krug. Like whoa. King Angry was loving the 1920, although Big Mike slightly preferred the Champagne that followed. It was an argument where both sides of the coin were heads… (96).
…since the next wine was a 1945 Krug. Sir Robert found it ‘wine-y,’ and while mild, it was sexily good. The Punisher admired its ‘great freshness.’ The palate was long and pretty with flavors of wheat, cream and oat. This was a beautiful bubbly, perhaps a touch delicate by the usual Krug standards, but in true Krug fashion, it still worked (95).
Our last Champagne for a while was courtesy of The Returner and oozed orange marmalade out of its nose. Wendy found it more ‘mango,’ and Ray observed ‘tropical botrytis,’ which Neil seconded. Its flavors also had the orange marmalade thing happening, along with game and what I wrote down as ‘white beef.’ Let’s just leave it at that! This 1969 Bollinger Vieilles Vignes Francaises was exotic and flirting with demi-sec. It is a bottle that I have never seen before, and may never see again – wait, Bruce has two more, phew (94).
The first flight of red wines set a high bar for the evening. It was a legendary flight of wines that would be near impossible to recreate. The first wine screamed ‘incredible’ at first whiff. It was full of menthol, rose, blood, iron and ‘peaty’ per Wendy. There was big volume in the nose, and everyone was rocking out to it accordingly. There was lots of earth, ‘chickory’ as Jim put it, as well as divine garden aromas. The palate was equally extraordinary, long like winter nights in Alaska. There was huge acidity to this incredibly rare 1945 DRC Richebourg Vieux Cepages, the last vintage of this mythical wine, made from one row of vines from a portion of the vineyard. I have had this wine only twice (this being my first ’45), and both bottles have been some of the best bottles of my life, and both bottles came from Big Boy. Merci beaucoup (97+).
The second wine in this flight had ‘La Tache’ qualities per King Angry. There was similar volume here, with hints of good stink. It was nutty, beefy and rusty; the nose was so deep, I got lost. The wine had a similar finish, its acid crackling and high pitch singing brightly. Big, round and decadent, this wine ‘screamed La Tache, a great La Tache’ per Sir Robert. It should have, as it was the 1945 DRC La Tache, courtesy of Jim and Wendy (96+).
Well, what could the last wine in this flight have been? Hmmmmm. All identities of the wines were revealed after a flight discussion, of course. Big Mike was loving the third wine, which would ultimately become about half the group’s wine of the night. So was I. It was deep like the Atlantic Ocean in its aromatic complexity. As good as the first two wines were, this took the intensity level up a notch. ‘So deep, so special,’ I wrote. Aromas of garden, rose, tobacco, tobasco and even a hint of sweet honey were all there. There was so much t ‘n a, the wine gave off an addictive vibe; if wine were a drug, this would be crack…in theory, of course. The palate was ‘so’ rich and ‘so’ spectacular, deep with a rusty power that made the other two wines fall back a point. It was the one, the only 1945 DRC Romanee Conti, still the greatest wine that I have ever had. As Big Boy likes to say, ‘Huge Cock’ (99+).
Where could we possibly go from here? How about eighty years back in time thanks to Big Mike. This ancient wonder had aromas of old book, game, wet wool and rhubarb. There was still excellent acidity in this long and rusty red, which was actually more brown than red. It was ‘too old’ per Ray, but I enjoyed its beefy and citrusy personality, even if it needed to be in a retirement home. It was an 1865 Charles Bernard Chambertin (93).
The second wine in this flight of four was unfortunately corked, which was a shame as it was a 1919 Vogue Musigny Vieilles Vignes (DQ).
The next wine garnished lots of praise. There was a hint of gas at first, which blew off into aromas of melba toast and layers of cherry fruit. The cherry carried over to the palate, which was rich, hearty, big and dark. Hints of horse and animal were also present, and its tannins melted across its long, earthy finish. There was real power here, and its animal qualities were of a gamy goodness. Jim noted, ‘roasted pepper tomato coulis.’ It was clearly the best of the flight, as it should have been, since it was a 1919 DRC Romanee Conti. Hello, dolly (97).
The final wine of this flight I didn’t like that much, although others did. There was oatmeal to the nose and this yeasty marzipan quality. Hints of dates rounded out its aromas. The palate was red and tight, a bit stalky, not vitaminy, but it did have a quality of some pill of the sorts. It was a bit weird. I just wasn’t into this 1919 Rousseau Chambertin Vieux Plants, especially after the RC. ‘That’s the problem with RC, it just crushes everything,’ Big Mike wisely observed (90?).
Onwards we went, and the next wine The Punisher was loving. There was a hint of good green, mon, to the nose. There were deep black and red fruits to its nose, along with a hint of volcanic ash and a touch of body odor, or maybe that was…never mind. It reminded someone of what 1999 might be many years down the road, and despite a hint of cardboard and gusset, this 1923 Vogue Musigny Vieilles Vignes was still outstanding (95).
What is a gusset, you might ask? We learned that from Big Boy, and it became word of the evening rather quickly. It is the under-part of one’s underwear. Why did that come up? You’ll have to ask Big Boy’s mother-in-law lol.
The next wine was ‘Back to Jesus’ territory, or back to Caesar, if you prefer. Big Boy had just asserted that he was the last remaining, living descendent of Julius Caesar. You can’t make this stuff up. Big Boy violently declared that this was ‘wine of the night.’ There was a definite RC element to the nose. There was so much iron, along with beautiful musk and a little menthol. The wine was very minty, and flavors of iron, spice and forest were everywhere. There was Lord of the Rings complexity in these woods. This was a spectacular bottle of 1923 DRC Les Gaudichots (98).
The third wine in this flight was the first RC that didn’t deliver the knockout punch for its given flight. The 1923 DRC Romanee Conti had lots of ‘brown sugar,’ per the King. Eddie found it, ‘a little funky.’ It was definitely a little weird, ‘a little metallic and hollow’ per Sir Robert. There was still impressive acid and length, but it was clearly not a great bottle (92A).
The last red wine before we went back to the world of Champagne was similar to the 1945 Vieux Cepages. Jim noted ‘peaty, smoky chickory’ again. There was a hint of vanilla and classic DRC rose oil, along with some cigar and a touch of stinky lady property. The palate was rich with great smack and acidity, almost endless acidity. Rose and tomato flavors rounded out this exceptional 1937 DRC Richebourg (96).
I should add that amongst the last four wines, there were a couple of DOA bottles (dead on arrival), and I didn’t bother to write down what they were, nor do I remember. Every time that happened, another wine was substituted despite the fact that this was already a lifetime worth of legendary wines. There were also a handful of questionable bottles, as vetted by Sir Robert, that were ultimately not served. I say this so everyone understands that when you play these stakes, there will be bad bets. Thankfully, Big Boy has the right attitude and understanding about it, unlike others with a lot more means than him.
After the parade of incredible wines, Big Mike joked, ‘this is like a telethon!’ On cue, out came some more Champagnes. Mark Twain once said, ‘Too much of anything is bad, but too much Champagne is just right.’ No one was complaining. The first bubbly had an exotic nose of morning milk and multiple spices, most notably jasmine. Sequoia trees and kindling aromas stood out in this smoky and oaky bubbly. It was waify and woody in its whiffs. There was secondary vanilla cream in its nose, and lots of vanilla cream on its palate, pointing in a Krug direction. Patman cooed, ‘I could drink this all night long.’ Someone hailed it, ‘the Cocaine of Champagne.’ I think that was supposed to be a good thing. It was absolutely delicious, long and pure, catnip for humans. It was the incredibly rare 1966 Krug Blanc de Blancs, the precursor for the Clos du Mesnil bottling that would appear thirteen years later for the first time. The ’66 was made only once and never again (97).
The next bubbly was sweet, musky and dusty, ‘so butterscotch,’ someone added. It was rich and creamy with nice acidity, ‘really special’ per Sir Robert. Buttery, balanced and stylistic, this 1911 Moet was an amazing bubbly (97).
Unfortunately, a 1921 Moet was a bit dirty and advanced, still rich in its fruit but possessing what I would call shark’s fin action. There was still a big finish to this Moet, but it was affected to the point of (DQ).
The 1889 Moet that followed was the oldest Champagne that I have ever had. Sir Robert noted ‘sassafrass and birch beer,’ and Ray ‘anise.’ Bruce concurred with ‘black licorice.’ The palate was rich and anisy, a bit much for my style, but it was hard not to respect it (90).
It was back to the reds with another serious nose. It was very DRC again, showing old, smoky and rusty aromas of tomato and rose oil. Again, there was some good stink here, that scent of a woman. The palate was delicious with round and smooth brown sugar and band-aid flavors. While mature, this was still an excellent wine, impressive for something from 1936, the 1936 DRC La Tache, that is. Finally a wine that I have never had! Just kidding :) (94).
The next wine was garden city in the nose, quite pungent with lots of animal and game aromas. The palate was rich and delicious with great tomato, rose and iron flavors. It reminded me of 1980, something which Sir Robert heartily seconded. It was another rarely seen vintage, 1940 DRC La Tache (96).
It was on to Bordeaux, and after the eight wines that followed, there was a small consensus that the Bordeaux should have been served before the Burgundies. Oh, well. The first Bordeaux was DOA, a 1892 Lafite Rothschild (DQ).
The next red got a ‘serious’ from Big Boy. Sir Robert added ‘graphite, archetypical house style.’ There was classic cedar, tobacco and graphite in its nose, along with some old book, cobwebs and sour cherry. The palate was long, sexy and elegant with great acidity. It was a gift from The Punisher, from his favorite cellar of the moment. This 1899 Lafite Rothschild delivered another great experience from that great cellar (94).
The Punisher delivered another knockout blow with a 1900 Lafite Rothschild from the same cellar. It was deeper and also classic with a perfect mélange of cassis, cedar, chocolate and tobacco. Smoky and full of carob and cedar flavors, its big palate was more tannic than the 1901 I loved so much, but the 1901 just charmed me to death, and I still give it the edge (95+).
I seemed to hit a lull in my notes at this point. After all, I started the day in Paris at approximately 3am New York time, and it was now approaching midnight in New York…and there was an auction the next day. I would recover, but for a brief period, my notes fell off a cliff. The 1881 Latour was sweet and port-like with nice cedar flavors (92). The 1924 Lafite Rothschild was all about the vegetables, grilled green pepper city (88). The 1934 Lafite Rothschild was stewed and full of paint aromas (DQ). The 1945 Haut Brion was figgy and gamy, perhaps a touch advanced and certainly not the best bottle of this legendary wine, but still impressive (94A).
A bottle of 1947 Cheval Blanc made me stop and take notice, however, re-energizing me for the rest of the evening. The signature motor oil jumped out of the nose. Cassis and plum fruit were also present in this ‘elegant and ethereal’ wine, as Sir Robert eloquently pontificated. The finish was long and of roof –licking material, while spice and hints of fig rounded out its palate. Its acidity was quite noticeable, more so than any bottle of this that I can recently remember. While someone summed it up as ‘a real good bottle of ’47 Cheval,’ I still think the 1948 has recently surpassed it (96).
It was back to Burgundy, and the following wine continued to breathe life back into my pen. The first wine had a spectacular nose, with a rose, iron and menthol trifecta. Deep aromas of cherry oil resulted in a balanced yet forceful nose. The palate was special, long and gritty with lots of forest yet still ‘super elegant, pretty and beautiful,’ per Sir Robert. Uh oh, it was a 1952 Ponsot Clos de la Roche. Big Boy definitely loves to stir the pot; thankfully, it is still legal to drink personal property lol. Well, if it wasn’t real, it was still oh so fucking good and definitely in the wines of the night category. I just can’t see something not real being that good, to be frank. I suppose other wine writers would have lowered their scores some after the identity was revealed to play it ‘safe,’ but I am what I am and I wrote what I wrote (97).
The Ponsot was paired with something completely different, a wine hailed as ‘lovely and delicious, so juicy,’ per Sir Robert, who seemed to be waking up as most of us were falling asleep. Actually, one guest was already asleep. Don’t worry, we won’t blow your cover, Tom :). This wine was big; baby definitely had back. Someone called it ‘a monster,’ and Eddie felt that it was opened ‘twenty years too young.’ I started to think this was my wine, as it had a Rhone edge, along with hints of hot stone, quince jam and sweet potato. The palate was peppery and tannic, solid all the way around and a great show for a 1954 Henri Bonneau Chateauneuf du Pape Reserve des Celestins. I was later told by the King that this was Bonneau’s first vintage, but I didn’t have a chance to fact check, so don’t hold me to it (96).
Mercifully, there was one more flight left. It was a very special flight, and unfortunately I didn’t have much left. I was approaching my 22nd consecutive hour, so please forgive the brief notes for wines that definitely deserved more detail. I wish that we could have had this flight the next day, but it is tough to stop the Big Boy Express once it has left the station.
The first wine had cola in the nose, as did all three wines, in fact. There was also a hint of exotic fruit, almost coconut, but its intense iron and rust could only mean one wine, RC, and it was good to see that it was when it was finally unveiled, it being a 1911 DRC Romanee Conti (95+).
The second wine of this flight and second to last wine on this night had ‘sea salt’ per Jim, and a powerful backside. That’s about all I wrote, except for something about a shadow that I can’t quite decipher. It was a 1915 DRC Romanee Conti, and it was qualitatively equivalent to the 1911 (95+).
The last wine on this night ended up becoming one of a few people’s wines of the night. The 1926 DRC Romanee Conti had an ‘intense, liqueury texture,’ per Sir Robert. While redder in its fruit profile than the previous two, that unmistakable rusty smack, which was present and consistent in all three wines, could only be RC. Rich, hearty, big and long were the rest of my notes, right before I scribbled, ‘I’m toast’ (97).
The group was split over wine of the night, with five votes a piece for the 1945 Romanee Conti and 1966 Krug Blanc de Blancs. What can I say? Champagne guys are definitely Champagne guys :). The 1923 Gaudichots got a vote from Wendy (and was my #2 of the night), and there were also a couple of votes for the 1919 RC. As far as everyone’s top three wines, the 1926 RC got a lot of mentions, as did some of the Richebourgs. The ’45 Vieux Cepages was my official #3, and I had a long list of #4’s (97 pointers). For me, a rating of 97 points or higher is a ‘wines of my life’ category. To have so many on one night was breathtaking.
It is safe to say that everyone is a bit of a skeptic nowadays, especially amongst this group, but on this starry night, Big Boy made everyone a believer again. If wine were professional wrestling, there would be only one ‘Living Legend.’ Eternal thanks must go to Rob for sharing from his collection such a spectacular array of incredible and rare wines.
Merry Christmas to all, and to all a great wine.
FIN
JK
A stellar lineup from Tuesday evening!
White:
- Chevalier Montrachet Grand Cru, Georges Deleger 99
- Corton Charlemagne Marc Colin 02
- Domaine Morey Les Pucelles 05
- N. Joly Coulee de Serrant 90
- Chablis Les Clos Ravenneau 99
- Meursault Coche Dury 01
Red:
- Corton Pougets Louis Jadot 90
- Chambolle Musigny Les Amoureses Roumier 93
- Bonnes Mares Roumier 93
- Cote Rotie Cote Blonde Rostaing 88
- Latour 66
- Gruaud Larose 83
- Gruaud Larose 82
- Haut Brion 85
- Clos de la Roche Grand Cru Maurice Ducherpozat, Hubert Lignier 97
- Penfolds Grange 83
- Kenwood Cabernet Sauvignon 93
- Clos des Ruchottes Ruchottes Chambertin Armand Rousseau 88
- Shafer Hillside Select 01
- Cos d'Estournel 85
- Ridge Montebello 84
- Bricco Bossia Vigna Ciciala Aldo Conterno 88
IF YOU CROSS THE NORTH KOREAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU GET 12 YEARS HARD LABOR.
IF YOU CROSS THE IRANIAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU ARE DETAINED INDEFINITELY.
IF YOU CROSS THE AFGHAN BORDER ILLEGALLY, YOU GET SHOT.
IF YOU CROSS THE SAUDI ARABIAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE JAILED.
IF YOU CROSS THE CHINESE BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU MAY NEVER BE HEARD FROM AGAIN.
IF YOU CROSS THE VENEZUELAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE BRANDED A SPY AND YOUR FATE WILL BE SEALED.
IF YOU CROSS THE CUBAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE THROWN INTO POLITICAL PRISON TO ROT.
IF YOU CROSS THE U.S. BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU GET:
A JOB,
A DRIVERS LICENSE,
SOCIAL SECURITY CARD,
WELFARE,
FOOD STAMPS,
CREDIT CARDS,
SUBSIDIZED RENT OR A LOAN TO BUY A HOUSE,
FREE EDUCATION,
FREE HEALTH CARE,
A LOBBYIST IN WASHINGTON
BILLIONS OF DOLLARS WORTH OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS PRINTED IN YOUR LANGUAGE
THE RIGHT TO CARRY YOUR COUNTRY'S FLAG WHILE YOU PROTEST THAT YOU DON'T GET ENOUGH RESPECT AND, IN MANY INSTANCES,
YOU CAN VOTE.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I HAD A FIRM GRASP ON THE SITUATION…
Here’s Holly Madison celebrating the release of Beaujolais Nouveau in Las Vegas the other night. Nothing says ‘Fine Wine’ like a barefoot Playboy Playmate crushing grapes with a Lucille Ball impersonator. Classy, shall I unscrew it for you?
Hayden Panettiere in a splashdown of champagne and faux glamour...
Stephen Colbert: Black Eyed Peas Missed Many 'Advertunities' in Latest Video
Turns Out 'I Gotta Feeling' Probably Has Four Product Placements
In last night's episode of "The Colbert Report," Stephen examined this year's summer jamz, and in the process took issue with the video for the Black Eyed Peas' latest hit, "I Gotta Feeling." He lamented: "Peas, please! You guys are the masters of the mass-market sell-out. You missed so many advertunities!"
To prove his point, Colbert highlighted the actual placements of products by HP, MAC Cosmetics and T-Mobile in the video and suggested various others that could have been, from fluorescent paint that could have been Sherwin Williams to a shark head on a bulls-eye that could have been a Target logo.
The funny thing is that the latter probably was an actual placement in this video, as the Peas have a deal with Target to cross-promote a special edition of their new album, and, as many probably noticed, this song appears in an ad they did for the retailer.
Of course, this begs the question: has a band/musician ever had five product placements in a video?
| The Colbert Report | Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c | |||
| MeTunes - Hit of the Summer | ||||
| ||||
They pour, sip and, with passion and snobbery, glorify or doom wines. But studies say the wine-rating system is badly flawed. How the experts fare against a coin toss.
By LEONARD MLODINOW
Acting on an informant's tip, in June 1973, French tax inspectors barged into the offices of the 155-year-old Cruse et Fils Frères wine shippers. Eighteen men were eventually prosecuted by the French government, accused, among other things, of passing off humble wines from the Languedoc region as the noble and five-times-as-costly wine of Bordeaux. During the trial it came out that the Bordeaux wine merchants regularly defrauded foreigners. One vat of wine considered extremely inferior, for example, was labeled "Salable as Beaujolais to Americans."
It was in this climate that in the 1970s a lawyer-turned-wine-critic named Robert M. Parker Jr. decided to aid consumers by assigning wines a grade on a 100-point scale. Today, critics like Mr. Parker exert enormous influence. The medals won at the 29 major U.S. wine competitions medals are considered so influential that wineries spend well over $1 million each year in entry fees. According to a 2001 study of Bordeaux wines, a one-point bump in Robert Parker's wine ratings averages equates to a 7% increase in price, and the price difference can be much greater at the high end.
Given the high price of wine and the enormous number of choices, a system in which industry experts comb through the forest of wines, judge them, and offer consumers the meaningful shortcut of medals and ratings makes sense.
But what if the successive judgments of the same wine, by the same wine expert, vary so widely that the ratings and medals on which wines base their reputations are merely a powerful illusion? That is the conclusion reached in two recent papers in the Journal of Wine Economics.
Both articles were authored by the same man, a unique blend of winemaker, scientist and statistician. The unlikely revolutionary is a soft-spoken fellow named Robert Hodgson, a retired professor who taught statistics at Humboldt State University. Since 1976, Mr. Hodgson has also been the proprietor of Fieldbrook Winery, a small operation that puts out about 10 wines each year, selling 1,500 cases
A few years ago, Mr. Hodgson began wondering how wines, such as his own, can win a gold medal at one competition, and "end up in the pooper" at others. He decided to take a course in wine judging, and met G.M "Pooch" Pucilowski, chief judge at the California State Fair wine competition, North America's oldest and most prestigious. Mr. Hodgson joined the Wine Competition's advisory board, and eventually "begged" to run a controlled scientific study of the tastings, conducted in the same manner as the real-world tastings. The board agreed, but expected the results to be kept confidential.
There is a rich history of scientific research questioning whether wine experts can really make the fine taste distinctions they claim. For example, a 1996 study in the Journal of Experimental Psychology showed that even flavor-trained professionals cannot reliably identify more than three or four components in a mixture, although wine critics regularly report tasting six or more. There are eight in this description, from The Wine News, as quoted on wine.com, of a Silverado Limited Reserve Cabernet Sauvignon 2005 that sells for more than $100 a bottle: "Dusty, chalky scents followed by mint, plum, tobacco and leather. Tasty cherry with smoky oak accents…" Another publication, The Wine Advocate, describes a wine as having "promising aromas of lavender, roasted herbs, blueberries, and black currants." What is striking about this pair of descriptions is that, although they are very different, they are descriptions of the same Cabernet. One taster lists eight flavors and scents, the other four, and not one of them coincide.
That wine critiques are peppered with such inconsistencies is exactly what the laboratory experiments would lead you to expect. In fact, about 20 years ago, when a Harvard psychologist asked an ensemble of experts to rank five wines on each of 12 characteristics—such as tannins, sweetness, and fruitiness—the experts agreed at a level significantly better than chance on only three of the 12.
Psychologists have also been skeptical of wine judgments because context and expectation influence the perception of taste. In a 1963 study at the University of California at Davis, researchers secretly added color to a dry white wine to simulate a sauterne, sherry, rosé, Bordeaux and burgundy, and then asked experts to rate the sweetness of the various wines. Their sweetness judgments reflected the type of wine they thought they were drinking. In France, a decade ago a wine researcher named Fréderic Brochet served 57 French wine experts two identical midrange Bordeaux wines, one in an expensive Grand Cru bottle, the other accommodated in the bottle of a cheap table wine. The gurus showed a significant preference for the Grand Cru bottle, employing adjectives like "excellent" more often for the Grand Cru, and "unbalanced," and "flat" more often for the table wine.
Provocative as they are, such studies have been easy for wine critics to dismiss. Some were small-scale and theoretical. Many were performed in artificial laboratory conditions, or failed to control important environmental factors. And none of the rigorous studies tested the actual wine experts whose judgments you see in magazines and marketing materials. But Mr. Hodgson's research was different.
In his first study, each year, for four years, Mr. Hodgson served actual panels of California State Fair Wine Competition judges—some 70 judges each year—about 100 wines over a two-day period. He employed the same blind tasting process as the actual competition. In Mr. Hodgson's study, however, every wine was presented to each judge three different times, each time drawn from the same bottle.
The results astonished Mr. Hodgson. The judges' wine ratings typically varied by ±4 points on a standard ratings scale running from 80 to 100. A wine rated 91 on one tasting would often be rated an 87 or 95 on the next. Some of the judges did much worse, and only about one in 10 regularly rated the same wine within a range of ±2 points.
Mr. Hodgson also found that the judges whose ratings were most consistent in any given year landed in the middle of the pack in other years, suggesting that their consistent performance that year had simply been due to chance.
Mr. Hodgson said he wrote up his findings each year and asked the board for permission to publish the results; each year, they said no. Finally, the board relented—according to Mr. Hodgson, on a close vote—and the study appeared in January in the Journal of Wine Economics.
"I'm happy we did the study," said Mr. Pucilowski, "though I'm not exactly happy with the results. We have the best judges, but maybe we humans are not as good as we say we are."
This September, Mr. Hodgson dropped his other bombshell. This time, from a private newsletter called The California Grapevine, he obtained the complete records of wine competitions, listing not only which wines won medals, but which did not. Mr. Hodgson told me that when he started playing with the data he "noticed that the probability that a wine which won a gold medal in one competition would win nothing in others was high." The medals seemed to be spread around at random, with each wine having about a 9% chance of winning a gold medal in any given competition.
To test that idea, Mr. Hodgson restricted his attention to wines entering a certain number of competitions, say five. Then he made a bar graph of the number of wines winning 0, 1, 2, etc. gold medals in those competitions. The graph was nearly identical to the one you'd get if you simply made five flips of a coin weighted to land on heads with a probability of 9%. The distribution of medals, he wrote, "mirrors what might be expected should a gold medal be awarded by chance alone."
Mr. Hodgson's work was publicly dismissed as an absurdity by one wine expert, and "hogwash" by another. But among wine makers, the reaction was different. "I'm not surprised," said Bob Cabral, wine maker at critically acclaimed Williams-Selyem Winery in Sonoma County. In Mr. Cabral's view, wine ratings are influenced by uncontrolled factors such as the time of day, the number of hours since the taster last ate and the other wines in the lineup. He also says critics taste too many wines in too short a time. As a result, he says, "I would expect a taster's rating of the same wine to vary by at least three, four, five points from tasting to tasting."
Francesco Grande, a vintner whose family started making wine in 1827 Italy, told me of a friend at a well-known Paso Robles winery who had conducted his own test, sending the same wine to a wine competition under three different labels. Two of the identical samples were rejected, he said, "one with the comment 'undrinkable.' " The third bottle was awarded a double gold medal. "Email Robert Parker," he suggested, "and ask him to submit to a controlled blind tasting."
I did email Mr. Parker, and was amazed when he responded that he, too, did not find Mr. Hodgson's results surprising. "I generally stay within a three-point deviation," he wrote. And though he didn't agree to Mr. Grande's challenge, he sent me the results of a blind tasting in which he did participate.
The tasting was at Executive Wine Seminars in New York, and consisted of three flights of five wines each. The participants knew they were 2005 Bordeaux wines that Mr. Parker had previously rated for an issue of The Wine Advocate. Though they didn't know which wine was which, they were provided with a list of the 15 wines, with Mr. Parker's prior ratings, according to Executive Wine Seminars' managing partner Howard Kaplan. The wines were chosen, Mr. Kaplan says, because they were 15 of Mr. Parker's highest-rated from that vintage.
Mr. Parker pointed out that, except in three cases, his second rating for each wine fell "within a 2-3 point deviation" of his first. That's less variation than Mr. Hodgson found. One possible reason: Mr. Parker's first rating of all the wines fell between 95 and 100—not a large spread.
One critic who recognizes that variation is an issue is Joshua Greene, editor and publisher of Wine and Spirits, who told me, "It is absurd for people to expect consistency in a taster's ratings. We're not robots." In the Cruse trial, the company appealed to the idea that even experienced tasters could err. Cruse claimed that it had bought the cheap Languedoc believing it was the kingly Bordeaux, and that the company's highly-trained and well-paid wine tasters had failed to perceive that it wasn't. The French rejected that possibility, and 35 years ago this December, eight wine dealers were convicted and given prison terms and fines totaling $8 million.
Despite his studies, Mr. Hodgson is betting that, like the French, American consumers won't be easily converted to the idea that wine experts are fallible. His winery's Web site still boasts of his own many dozens of medals.
"Even though ratings of individual wines are meaningless, people think they are useful," Mr. Greene says. He adds, however, that one can look at the average ratings of a spectrum of wines from a certain producer, region or year to identify useful trends.
As a consumer, accepting that one taster's tobacco and leather is another's blueberries and currants, that a 91 and a 96 rating are interchangeable, or that a wine winning a gold medal in one competition is likely thrown in the pooper in others presents a challenge. If you ignore the web of medals and ratings, how do you decide where to spend your money?
One answer would be to do more experimenting, and to be more price-sensitive, refusing to pay for medals and ratings points. Another tack is to continue to rely on the medals and ratings, adopting an approach often attributed to physicist Neils Bohr, who was said to have had a horseshoe hanging over his office door for good luck. When asked how a physicist could believe in such things, he said, "I am told it works even if you don't believe in it." Or you could just shrug and embrace the attitude of Julia Child, who, when asked what was her favorite wine, replied "gin."
As for me, I have always believed in the advice given by famed food critic Waverly Root, who recommended that one simply "Drink wine every day, at lunch and dinner, and the rest will take care of itself."
—Leonard Mlodinow teaches randomness at Caltech. His most recent book is "The Drunkard's Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives."
Paumanok Winery
Tainted Cork woke early on a rainy Thursday in August to make the trek from Montauk to the north fork. After retiring from IBM, Charles Massoud and his family founded our first stop, Paumanok winery, in the early 80’s. The name Paumanok has significant meaning; it is the Native American name for Long Island (NY), meaning "the island that pays tribute." In the colonial times, Long Islanders were forced to pay the Indians a tributary fee not to be attacked by them. Paying my own tribute to parochial education, I remember the way Walt Whitman used Paumanok to describe his special place in “Leaves of Grass.”
The winery is a renovated turn-of-the-century barn that houses a fermentation tank room and lab. The tasting room was built on top of the barrel cellar and is surrounded by a deck that overlooks the vineyards. Although it was raining, I was fortunate enough to sit with Charles on the deck to discuss his winery and taste through his splendid current releases and a few vintages of library wines.
The winery focuses on high quality commercial grapes like Chardonnay, Riesling, Sauvignon Blanc, Merlot, Cabernet Sauvignon, and Cabernet Franc and features some unique parcels of Chenin Blanc and Petit Verdot. All the fruit is estate-grown and the viticulture is very traditional with dense plantings of nearly 1100 vines per acre. Total production is just under 9000 cases. I enjoyed all the wines immensely and the following 2 wines are indeed unique standouts:
2007 Chenin Blanc
Chenin Blanc, a Loire Valley and South African staple is an amazing little grape that can be innocuous or have tremendous aging potential. In the hands of the Paumanok folks the grape has flourished and the 2007 seems to have benefited from maximum ripeness. The wine is a blend of two lots; one was handpicked and whole cluster pressed, the other machine harvested. The fruit was delivered directly to the press (by-passing the crusher) and the juice was immediately chilled and allowed to settle. The two lots were cold fermented separately in stainless steel tanks to preserve varietal character.
Tasting Note: Fresh and racy yet dry and clean. I got a waft of fresh cut pineapple, with subtle notes of melon and green apple. Would be great as a cocktail wine or with any grilled fish that you would squeeze fresh lemon on. Bring out the oysters!
2005 Petit Verdot Apollo Drive Vineyard Limited Edition
2005 was hot and produced amazing wines in almost all the major growing regions of the world, Long Island was no exception. Petit Verdot is used as Bordeaux blending grape and can be found in blends and stand alone offerings in California. It’s a funny grape that can be amazingly dense and opulent when drunk young and benefits from a few years in bottle. However as a single varietal I like to drink petit verdot within the first 5 years of being bottled. Charles tells me that despite the deluge of rain in October (21 inches of rain in 8 days), they harvested what was perhaps one of our best crops ever. The grapes came from a single block on Apollo Drive with average yields of 1.75 to 2 tons per acre and were carefully de-stemmed and sorted to retain a larger number of whole berries. Free run Juice was separated from the must to insure that only the softest tannins were extracted. After the fermentation was complete, the free run and the must was drained into French oak barrels for 14 months prior to bottling.
Tasting Note: Dense and Spicy, with concentrated black fruit flavors and inky black in color. This full-bodied wine possesses ample tannins and would accompany and grilled meats or roasts. I am conjuring Images of lamb stew by the fireplace and goblet of petite Verdot. This wine can be cellared for many years.
PAUMANOK Vineyards
North Fork of Long Island
1074 Main Road (Route 25)
P.O. Box 741, Aquebogue, NY 11931
Phone: (631) 722-8800 Fax: (631) 722-5110
Email: info@paumanok.com
Paumanok Tasting Room is open for tastings and sales 7 days a week from 11 AM - 6 PM, April through October and 11 AM - 5 PM. BUSES, LIMOS, VANS OR ANY GROUP OF EIGHT OR MORE PEOPLE BY APPOINTMENT ONLY
Directions to Paumanok Vineyards from The Hamptons
Take Route 27 to the Riverhead exit. This will put you onto Route 24 North. Take 24 to Route 105. Make a right onto 105 North. Take 105 to Route 25. Make a right onto 25 and continue for two miles. Paumanok is located on the left or north side of the road.
Minister backs plan to accept high-quality wines and prosciutto from struggling producers
The plan follows an Italian tradition of accepting wheels of parmesan cheese as loan collateral
Italian bank vaults may soon resemble well stocked delicatessens if a plan goes ahead to accept expensive wines and dry-cured hams as collateral on bank loans from crisis-hit producers.
The idea, which was launched this week by an influential Italian bank chairman and wine producer, was backed by an Italian minister and follows the tradition of Italian banks storing massive wheels of parmesan cheese as loan collateral.
"We've done it with cheese, why not with prosciutto and good wines like Brunello di Montalcino and chianti classico?" said Gianni Zonin, chairman of the Banca Popolare di Vicenza and head of wine producer Zonin.
"This is a great idea, it has my blessing," said Luca Zaia, the Italian agriculture minister.
The Italian bank Credito Emiliano has long stored hundreds of thousands of parmesan wheels, worth about ¤300 each, in warehouses as collateral while they age.
Since the bank can sell the cheese if creditors default, it can afford to offer low interest rates to an industry which is suffering from recession and supermarket discounting.
Legs of cured ham, or prosciutto crudo, weighing about 10kg, can sell for hundreds of euros after months of curing in controlled conditions, while bottles of Brunello di Montalcino are regularly snapped up for the same amount.
"We may start off with accepting wine as collateral, but I would prefer the Italian banking association to launch an industry-wide scheme which involves a range of products," said Zonin. "This will help producers in times of crisis as well as when the economy picks up."
Zaia said he would take the matter up with the Italian treasury minister.
"Apart from meeting the need of companies for liquidity, this proposal also recognises that our true gold reserves are the excellent products we make in Italy," he said.
Situated on a beautiful plot of land in Bridgehampton with 28 acres under vines, this small winery produces more unique small batch wines than wineries 10 times the size. The dizzying array of fascinating grape varieties originate from France, Italy, Germany and Austria. Some of the grapes in Channing wines are: Chardonnay, Pinot Grigio, Tocai Friulano, Sauvignon Blanc, Muscat, Malvasia, Gewurztraminer and Pinot Bianco. And the red varieties: Merlot, Blaufrankisch, Pinot Noir, Dornfelder, Cabernet Franc and Cabernet Sauvignon.
The notion of Mr. Channing and his daughters working the vines is a quaint idea. Channing does have four daughters; however, none work in the business. The passionate partners running the winery operate like a family and helped Walter Channing, a successful venture capitalist and artist, realize his dream since planting the first Chardonnay vines at his Bridgehampton farm in 1982. Partners Larry Perrine (CEO and expert on soil/climate/wine interaction on Long Island), Christopher Tracy (winemaker) and Allison Dubin (GM) run a small-dedicated team in the winery and tasting room.
I had the luxury of tasting nearly all the commercial wines and some new tank samples ready for bottling. All of Channing’s wines are eminently drinkable and possess a distinctive point-of-view. The white wines are the standout selections here, with almost all of the wines being blends of at least 4 grapes. The finds to find include:
2007 Mosaico
Mosaico is an exotic field blend that is a medium-bodied dry white wine with a clear, pale gold appearance. There are clean, mineral driven aromas with exotic flourishes of melon and tangerine that pop from the glass. The blend is made up of 32% Pinot Grigio, 29% Chardonnay, 14% Sauvignon Blanc, 12% Muscat, 7% Tocai Friulano and 6% Gewurztraminer. There is great intensity of flavor and a long spicy finish. Mosaico is a great match for fish, roast chicken and pastas. 568 cases produced.
2008 Pinot Grigio
Please put down the Santa Margherita and step away from the shelf! Pinot Grigio gets a bad wrap as a thin, dilute, innocuous wine - luckily Channing’s Pinot Grigio is dry and clean yet alive with minerality and spice. The fruit is hand–harvested, whole cluster-pressed, fermented in both stainless steel barrels and older French and Slovenian oak barrels. Enjoy with local fish and shellfish (especially fried), sheep’s milk cheeses and charcuterie. 1178 cases produced.
2007 Vino Bianco
The winery’s flagship white blend is a tasty, dry, medium-bodied white wine that offers complex aromas with bright acidity. At first glance, you’d think this wine to contains “the kitchen sink” blend: the 2007 version is made up of 32% Tocai Friulano, 25% Sauvignon Blanc, 17% Pinot Grigio, 9% Chardonnay (Dijon clone 96) and 17% Chardonnay (“Musque” clone). However, this complex white wine has layers of texture and flavor. Hints of green apples, lemon zest and pears are matched with clean floral aromas balanced by bright acidity. Like all Channing wines, the fruit is all handpicked and hand sorted. Enjoy with shellfish, chicken, pork or veal preparations. 1208 cases were produced.
2007 Rosso Fresco
This easy-drinking entry-level red is an amazing cocktail and party wine. Ruby in color with a purple rim, this medium-bodied, dry wine tastes of plum, black cherry and black raspberry, with a slightly smoky, gamey character. The varieties and proportions change with each vintage; the 2007 Rosso Fresco is created from 80% Merlot, 14% Syrah, 2% Blaufrankisch, 2% Cabernet Franc and 2% Dornfelder. Rosso Fresco is a playful, full-flavored, friendly red wine that pairs well with pastas or any four-legged food. 1200 cases produced.
The vibe at Channing daughters is very serious yet incredibly welcoming. Their methods remain traditional and artisanal; they do everything by hand in small batches from handpicking the grapes to stomping the fruit by foot. The attention to detail is also evident on the packaging – the distinctive wine labels are both cool and modern and complement the quality of what’s in the bottle. A must stop and see for any Hamptons traveler.
Tasting Room: Open 7 days, 11-5. Open to the public but groups of 6 should make an appointment, please contact the winery prior to the day you’d like to visit. Tastings are free to wine club members, and $6 for the general public. Please, no dogs or cell phones or smoking in the tasting room.
Directions: Montauk Highway (Rt. 27) past Watermill. Turn left onto Scuttlehole Road. Vineyard is approximately 3.5 miles from Rt. 27. Watch for Winery sign on right-hand side of road.
Channing Daughters Winery, 1927 Scuttlehole Rd, Bridgehampton, 631-537-7224,channingdaughters.com
By To 27 Contributor Brian J. DiMarco, Managing Director of Barterhouse
Friday, August 7th 2009 - 4:32 am UTC
Chilean winemakers nearly swept an international wine contest in July, winning all but a few accolades at the event. The contest, Vinalies Cata d’or América Latina 2009, was held at the Hyatt Hotel in Santiago The competition, put on by Italy, Spain and Portugal, as well as Brazil, Uruguay and Bolivia.
Chilean vineyards came out the big winners of the event, taking home 51 of 52 gold medals and 64 of 69 silver medals. “Best Red,” a 2007 Shiraz from the Arboleda Vineyard, and “Best White,” a 2009 Sauvignon Blanc from J. Bouchon were among the judges’ favorites.
Only one gold medal was awarded to a non-Chilean wine; a Bolivian wine won for “Best Distilled.”
Following the rules of Vinalies Internationales, a French wine tasting and rating organization, the Chilean contest had five committees doing blind taste tests, each with three local and two international judges and a French wine expert, or enologist, presiding.
Chile has long enjoyed prestige as one of the world’s best wine-growing regions, particularly due to its rich, diverse climate and its lack of phylloxera, a pest that decimated European and North American vineyards and began the practice of grafting grapevine species together to maximize resistance against various pests.
Chilean wines won the top two spots at the Berlin Tasting in 2009, held in Stockholm, beating out the world-famous Château Lafite, classified as one of the four best French wines in the world.
The country ranked 11th in the world for total vineyard acreage in 2006 with 479,000 acres, an increase of roughly one third since the year 2000, and tenth for total production by ton, with over 2.2 million tons in 2006.
Chile is also 38th in the world for per-capita wine consumption, right below French Polynesia and above Aruba, with 15.5 litres consumed per person in 2005, an 11.11% increase since 2001.
By Daniel Zarchy - Santiago Times
 |
We're not sure how the SLA investigators make these calls anyway. Are agents trained to tell Stoli from Georgi? Or is do they have some sort of device that detects parts-per-million of class?
Bar owners are naturally displeased with the heavy hand of the law. "We paid $8,000 for a fruit fly," says Crash Mansion's Nancy Brady, who was dunned when one such sweet-liquor-loving insect was perceived in a bottle of Jack.
At least they don't have the headache faced by some folks upstate in Troy who invested heavily in a bar only to be denied a license by the SLA because they're across the street from a Salvation Army outpost, even though there are other bars nearby. Image via The Insider.
On Joel Salatin's farm in north-central Virginia, it's a pig's life. Free of the concrete sties and steel pens used in most large hog operations, Salatin's swine spend their days roaming lazily through a leafy green forest, foraging for food, maybe stopping every once in a while for a good scratch on a tree trunk.
Salatin does not run a hog-rescue operation. All of his pigs are headed, eventually, for the dinner table. And not just any dinner table: One of the top buyers of Salatin's pork happens to be Chipotle, the nationwide Tex-Mex restaurant chain.
Watch the full story tonight on "Nightline" TONIGHT at 11:35 p.m.
The slow-food movement, which seeks to connect food on the table with its source, may not be on the verge of overtaking the fast-food industry. But for Chipotle -- frequently grouped in the fast-food category -- the extra cost of buying from smaller, specialty farmers like Salatin is worth it.
On a recent visit to Salatin's outfit, Polyface Farms, Chipotle founder and chairman Steve Ells talked with "Nightline" about how the restaurant balances low prices and quality products. Chipotle buys no pork from factory farms and avoids chicken and most beef treated with hormones or antibiotics, he said.
"I think it's really important that people know where their food comes from," Ells told "Nightline." "I mean we spend a lot of time researching the very best sources so that when people go to Chipotle, they can rest assured they are getting great food. ... Joel is a leader in this movement. And really, doing things sort of the way they should be done. And it's a great example for everybody to follow."
Salatin's great example is founded on a view of livestock that not every farmer holds. He wants his pigs to be, well, happy.
"The beauty of this is they get to choose what they eat, whether they want to eat green material, whether they want to eat the local ... grain, so we trust the pig to make that decision, you know, on what he wants to eat," Salatin said.
Then he elaborated.
"The other thing is that they get to fully express their pigness. This fully respects and honors the pigness of the pig. You know, in our culture today, our Western, reductionist, Roman, linear, fragmented ... culture, we don't ask how to make a pig happy. We ask how to grow it faster, fatter, bigger, cheaper, and that's not a noble goal. A noble goal -- how do I make a pig happy, because a happy pig is one that will have the nice nutrition and will know our respect and honor of the inherent pigness of the pig, which translates, as a culture, how we respect and honor the John-ness of John, or the Mary-ness of Mary."
Ells had a more prosaic take on the virtues of smaller farms.
"Well, first of all, you can breathe here and it smells great," he said. "You can't breathe in a confinement operation. The odor is horrific. And you can see the terror in the pigs' eyes. And they scurry away from you. And they are chewing on the metal bars. And it's so unpleasant. And when I first saw that 10 years ago, I knew that I never wanted to buy another confinement pig, and have that be part of our business model.
"So none of our pigs come from the factory farms anymore," he said. "They are outdoor raised or in deeply bedded barns. They are never given any antibiotics or growth hormones.
"One hundred percent of the chickens that we serve are served vegetarian diet," he said. "And not given antibiotics, and most of our beef now comes from the naturally raised protocol with no hormones and antibiotic-free."
Chipotle buys from a few thousand farms like Salatin's around the country. Ells said he always knew he wanted Chipotle to be different.
"When I started Chipotle 16 years ago, I wanted to show that just because we serve food quickly and conveniently doesn't mean we have to be a typical fast-food experience," he said. "And so we cooked fresh ingredients, in front of the customer, in an open kitchen. There was nothing to hide, there was total transparency."
Ells is actually a classically trained chef. After graduating from cooking school, he opened his first Chipotle, a burrito shop, in Denver in 1993. It was supposed to be a stepping stone to a "real" restaurant.
"I was this aspiring chef, but I needed a little cash cow, I needed something that could fund my restaurant," Ells said. "So I started Chipotle."
Ells said he doesn't mind the fast-food label.
"You know, I don't really get hung up on titles," he said. "I mean, one thing is for sure, Chipotle is very quick and very convenient. But I think we have elevated traditional fast food."
For all the talk about green pastures and animal comfort, the financial engine behind Chipotle was a corporation not always associated with nature's way: McDonald's. The company was the major investor in Chipotle until 2006.
"It was not a strange marriage," Ells said. "I mean, initially I thought it didn't make much sense, my early investors had suggested that I go to McDonald's, and I sent them a business plan and got to meet a lot of the folks over there and they liked what we were doing and so, for a seven-year period, they funded the growth. But they let us run the business, they were primarily a financial thriver behind the business.
"I think that both of us wanted to go our own way, you know, I think that McDonald's focused on their hamburger business years ago, and sort of getting rid of all their partner brands was a good thing for them," he said.
Chipotle's focus on its food sources is hardly cost-free.
"Chipotle has higher food costs than our competitors," Ells said. "A little bit higher. But we have a business model that allows us to invest in higher-quality food, and it's great because obviously, this higher-quality food tastes better, which brings people back and it forms a deep bond with the customer."
Salatin credited Ells for his commitment to smaller farms.
"Any person that didn't have that much passion as Steve did, would've just quit," Salatin said. "But they continued to hold our hand into an arena that we weren't used to, to ensure that we could walk through that door."
What about the customer? Will they pay more for locally farmed, free-range, antibiotic- and hormone-free meat?
"Well, I think they will appreciate it more," Ells said. "Again, this is a journey. It's not like you can flip a switch and have 100 percent, you know, free-ranging beef and chicken and pork on the menu at every restaurant in the U.S. It doesn't happen that way.
"This is something that is going to take time," he said. "But I think the movement is gaining speed now. And I am very excited to see lots of chefs really pay attention to where they purchase food. Not only for better-tasting food, but also for the social responsibility aspect of it."
It's not clear whether you can taste social responsibility, but you can taste a good burrito. Regardless of whether you can taste a happy pig, it is a happy meal.
