RSS05/14/08 Wine Q&A
Yakima Herald-Republic
E-mail
Print
More 'Wine'
- Wine adviser: Competition ever tougher for year's best state wines
- Wine Adviser: What would the holidays be without new wine gadgets?
- 12/10 Wine Q&A
- Uncork special wine while cutting costs
- Champagne from Champagne really worth the price
- Wine adviser: Now, for Thanksgiving reds ...
- 11/12/08 Wine Q&A
Q. A recent wine column in the Wall Street Journal stated a large disappointment in merlots that cost $20 to $50. The final listing of nine were California only despite the authors including Washington labels in their tastings. I'm not too sure how much I agree, but I do feel (for my own taste) a definite drop in merlot quality recently.
How do you react to this theory? The best merlots I have had in the past year were all from B.C. and they are hard to find here.
A. Merlot has been every national wine critic's favorite whipping boy for the past few years. Yet in my view, Washington continues to produce outstanding merlots in every price range. Your sense that there was a drop in quality recently may well reflect the quite different types of vintages that Washington has had recently.
Merlots from 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006 are all showing clear vintage character, and some styles may suit your tastes more than others. I see improvement pretty much across the board, even at the bargain bottle level (see today's column for some good suggestions).
I too wish the British Columbia wines were more available here in the U.S. But due to the way the wines are distributed, that does not seem likely to happen anytime soon.
* Paul Gregutt can be reached at wine@seattletimes.com.
