The Subjectivity of Wine
Here’s a funny story that I saw on Reddit today, and proves two things I’ve always believed:
1) Wine is bullshit
2) Wine-tasters are bullshit.
“Experts” are given two glasses of the same white wine, one of them with red food-coloring so it appears to be red wine. Will the taste-testers notice, or will they just babble on about stupid reasons why the “red wine” is great?
One expert praised its “jamminess,” while another enjoyed its “crushed red fruit.” Not a single one noticed it was actually a white wine.
Huzzah, assholes. What could be more fun than sticking it to wine tasters with red food coloring? Well, how about the same test, but instead the one wine is in two different bottles, one cheap-ish and one expensive-ish.
The grand cru was “agreeable, woody, complex, balanced and rounded,” while the vin du table was “weak, short, light, flat and faulty”. Forty experts said the wine with the fancy label was worth drinking, while only 12 said the cheap wine was.
So 12 out of 40 wine-tasters aren’t full of crap. I’ve always thought that most wine tastes alike (which is to say, tastes like ass), and that fancy expensive wine doesn’t actually taste better, it just seems like it does because you paid more for it. Tez - 1, Wine testers - 0
From- The Frontal Cortex, a very cool site that I’m going to start reading more often
Comments
Leave a Reply