For The Love Of Port

Although he only reviewed the 2007 vintage, Jay Miller was appointed to do the Port reviews a few years back. Given recent events, and more than one troubling scandal, Miller is no longer part of TWA. I can only speculate but have no real idea, that Mark Squires who is already doing Portuguese table wine coverage will also take on Port for Parker's wine magazine.

http://www.drvino.com/2011/12/04/jay-mi ... rt-parker/

RP doesn't say anything about who will take over Port, although he mentions who will take over all other wine areas that Jay covered....no surprise he's not mentioned a word about Port, again.

What is really sad is that the guy who just happened to review one vintage of Port for the Wine Advocate (2007) had such a dismal track record in all other regions he reviewed and multiple scandals in his short career, that it is actually taking some very serious hits on the WA as a serious consumer advocate of wine. There are some really fine people associated with it nowadays, albeit overwhelmed by all of the new regions they've been assigned, but in time they should be able to learn and hopefully write about those regions with authority. It is a shame though, that one man's disservice (JM), can have such a huge affect on Parker's nearly 30 years of wine writing and tarnish the legacy of his brand.

Roy Hersh wrote:What is really sad is that the guy who just happened to review one vintage of Port for the Wine Advocate (2007) had such a dismal track record in all other regions he reviewed and multiple scandals in his short career, that it is actually taking some very serious hits on the WA as a serious consumer advocate of wine. There are some really fine people associated with it nowadays, albeit overwhelmed by all of the new regions they've been assigned, but in time they should be able to learn and hopefully write about those regions with authority. It is a shame though, that one man's disservice (JM), can have such a huge affect on Parker's nearly 30 years of wine writing and tarnish the legacy of his brand.

Yes it is a terrible shame that JM has seriously tarnished the WA's reputation. A reputation that has taken a long time to achieve and maintain. But is it really one man who's done this? Look at the history of the RP's choice of reviewers and the area's they cover. Not exactly a great track record in the past decade. A cycle that is possibly starting over with his new choice of areas to be covered by a reviewer that self-admittedly doesn't care for the wines. One would think you'd select reviewers that are at least somewhat passionate and knowledgeable about the region they're going to cover.

Let's be accurate. It is not a decade, unless you are specifically pointing at Pierre Rovani and although many may disagree with his reviews of Burgundy, nobody questioned whether he understood the region. So to be fair and accurate, Parker did not bring in others beyond Rovani until five years ago or thereabouts. Otherwise, I don't disagree.

Roy Hersh wrote:Let's be accurate. It is not a decade, unless you are specifically pointing at Pierre Rovani and although many may disagree with his reviews of Burgundy, nobody questioned whether he understood the region. So to be fair and accurate, Parker did not bring in others beyond Rovani until five years ago or thereabouts. Otherwise, I don't disagree.

But that is where it started, with P.R. and his subsequently being assigned Ports. IIRC with the 2003 vintage was his first classic declaration review, which proved interesting shall we say. Matter of fact IIRC he had a pretty scathing review of 2003 Niepoort VP, a Port not even listed in their main tasting note database.

And I should point out "in the last decade" is meant as exactly that, last decade, as in 2000-2010, an accurate statement.

A bit off topic...as I was perusing WA database there is almost no single quinta Ports reviewed and only a couple "non-classic" years (individual bottles here and there, not an overall review). And those very few were mostly reviewed some 15+ years ago by Parker.

So does that mean that you're actually still "PAYING to play" there?

Andy wrote:

But that is where it started, with P.R. and his subsequently being assigned Ports. IIRC with the 2003 vintage was his first classic declaration review, which proved interesting shall we say. Matter of fact IIRC he had a pretty scathing review of 2003 Niepoort VP, a Port not even listed in their main tasting note database.

Of my 14,000+ posts on Ebob back in the day, the most attention ever paid to a thread I started on Port (or Madeira/Douro wine) was the one in which I challenged Pierre, based on his first and ONLY review of Vintage Ports. There were more posts than any other Port thread I ever saw there and a lot between Pierre and me directly. As you still have access, I'd love if you could find that thread and tell me the start date or provide a URL for me (please ) as I recently had the discussion with a Port maker on this very thread and would love to be able to find it, er have someone find it for me. There were several very fine 2003's that he rated so low that they were put into that box on the right hand page in the WA where wines un-reviewed showed up if they scored under 85 points.

Andy Velebil wrote:

Roy Hersh wrote:One would think you'd select reviewers that are at least somewhat passionate and knowledgeable about the region they're going to cover.

No kidding.