This Cab’s for You

rubegoldbergI’ll admit from the outset that I’m somewhat of a technophobe.  It took me awhile to get a cellphone that had e-mail capabilities, I fumble around with Excel like Garo Yepremeian in the ’73 Super Bowl and need my eight year old son to help me set up a password on my computer.

But with all this said, can we please, please slow down when it comes to wine innovation?

So now some resourceful restauranteurs are using a keg system to serve wine by the glass, making it not only cheaper but less wasteful, as the wine can last far longer than it would with a corked bottle behind the bar.  Yes, all these things on the surface are good – it’s hard to complain when the wine being poured into a glass you have purchased is as fresh and flavorful as if the bottle was just opened and yet, at the same time, part of the allure of wine is the ancient way its rituals have been passed down for thousands of years.

In some ways, I want my friendly neighborhood bar keep to grab that bottle of Pinot from behind him, pull the cork and pour my glass right in front of me instead of having to put on a Hazmat suit, flip the carbon filtration system to the ready position – which can only be done together with another co-worker who must turn his key at exactly the same moment, set the pour spout to “ON” and wait for the wine, forced by nitrogen, to make its serpentine journey from wherever, into a glass to be served.

I know I love my Petite Sirah cut with a little N.  Don’t you?

Now you may ask, “Okay, Daddy Traditionalist, what about screw tops?”  Okay, I like them.  Not to replace corks but just to assist in my laziness.  I love the feeling of going to open a school night wine and finding a screw top.  Means I’ll be drinking sooner.  But I prefer when I buy wine at a restaurant, to enjoy the whole experience of having the wine presented to me, the cork being pulled by the sommelier or server and having the wine come to my glass that way.

Call me old fashioned, call me a curmudgeon, heck call me about to turn 44 (hopefully that explains some of my charming contradictions).

For me, wine is one of life’s pleasures that does not require updating with fast aging swizzle sticks, Wine Pod’s (is Apple suing?) or any other Jetsons-esque machinery for getting me my glassful of vino.

Just pull and pour, baby.

Published in: on April 9, 2009 at 10:18 am  Leave a Comment  

Grape Madness – The Championship

# Team                           Spread       Money Line      Total Points
101 Bodega Norton       7.5(-110)     +305                  153.5(-110)
102 Chateau Chevalier -7.5(-110)    -370                 153.5(-110)

sportsbookThirty-two wines started this competition a few weeks ago, all with a chance to win the first year of Grape Madness, but there can only be one winner.

The tournament was filled with upsets, interesting observations about our own palates, controversy and of course many purple stained teeth.  In fact, I hereby give a shout out to Crest White Strips as a sponsor next year!

When it came down to the Final Four though, I don’t think any of the wines were a complete surprise.  Regardless of their price point (and subsequent initial ranking) all four finalists had the pedigree, if not in brand, then in region and varietal.

So Marc and I went into our final tasting expecting both wines to show well.  The Chevalier was my pick to win it all, and admittedly my mind set for this pick could be misconstrued as “insider trading.”  You see, the Chevalier is a Cabernet Sauvignon from the Spring Mountain appellation of Napa.  So was the 2002 Waugh Cellars Cabernet Sauvignon, our first Cab vintage and a wine that exhibited such wonderful tannins and soft fruit right out of the gate, that I’ve been a fan of the region and its Cabs ever since.

As for the Bodega, well, not only did I pick it out of obscurity and into my shopping cart but it stormed through the Cost Plus bracket with authority, making it (in my mind) a slight favorite, even though you’d have to consider it the underdog.

(1) Chateau Chevalier versus (3) Bodega Norton Malbec

The Chevalier came out tentative, and I could not help but wonder whether or not its completely blank cork was indicative of an imposter (read: a shiner) – wine biz speak for a wine bought pre-bottled but unlabeled and then branded by a third company.  There is nothing wrong with this very common practice but perhaps the big stage was too much at the start.

Meanwhile the Bodega came out with a big spicy, jammy nose with a touch of Menthol.  The fruit wasn’t there, which was surprising and the wine was noticeably tannic but you could tell it would open up.

The game was close.

In the second half, the Chevalier was displaying a nice nose of musty apples (okay, that doesn’t sound pleasant – but it was) and a great balance, something I look for in all the wines I drink (instilled in me by talented winemaker – and fellow Grape Madness participant – Ryan Waugh.)

The Bodega, so impesssive in earlier rounds wasn’t going anywhere though, its ever present fruit muted in the confines of the big game.  Could nerves be playing a part for the young Argentine too?

Before unveiling the wines from their paper bags, Marc and I compared notes and both agreed that the wine on the left had prevailed, narrowly, by buzzer beater like margins.  And we were a little disappointed because we really thought the Malbec was going to show better and it just came up short to the tougher and more expensive opponent.

We arrived at a score of 87-86 for the winner and Champion in the first annual Grape Madness…

…And then we ripped open the bags…

ncb_g_mens_ncaa_trophy_2001Bodega Norton Malbec

Amazingly, after spending the whole blind tasting believing the Chevalier was the more impressive wine, and frankly exhibiting characteristics not normally associated with Cabs, we now knew why, it wasn’t the Cab after all.

And on the flip side, the Bodega, which had been so fruit forward and unbeatable in the previous rounds tasted like a different wine, one that we preferred by a hair despite its showing.

Once again, the real winner in Grape Madness was the process of blind tasting.  You never know what you might discover.

It was a blast taking part in this event and with a little discussion, taking into account what worked well – and what didn’t, I’m sure the head to head tastings each March will become a favorite, one that I hope will garner more and more readers and participants.

For those that did fill out brackets, you have my thanks.   See you next time!

Published in: on April 6, 2009 at 8:03 pm  Comments (3)  

Grape Madness: The Final Four (aka Don’t Cry for Me…)

argentina2Throughout the course of Grape Madness, there have been charges lobbied from all directions at the blind tastings, some educated, others basically the rantings of the oenocologically challenged.

But one fact that cannot be overlooked whether you are Robert Parker or someone with the initials DG is that we each go into the evaluation of any wine with our preferences on our palate.

For me, over the years I’ve become more accustomed to, and enjoy more, those wines that exhibit strong upfront fruit, not a “bomb” per se but certainly not an austere, trust me this will be good in fifteen years kind of wine.

So heading into the Final Four this weekend, I felt I knew a lot about the wines I was tasting and like RJ in the Northern California brackets, I too went into my first final four matchup with a certain expectation of what was going to happen, even if I did not know what wine was in what bag.

(3)Talus Pinot Noir versus (3) Bodega Norton Malbec

Both of these wines deserved to be in the Final Four.  Talus, a sure fire early exit pick of mine got through its part of the bracket against two more expensive challengers and showed its worth in a close but sure handed victory over the Rawson’s Retreat.

But like an aging fighter visited in the locker room by an Atlantic City mob boss and told, “Sorry kid, this ain’t your night.” the light and airiness of the Pinot, so pleasant in the Elite Eight, really did not stand a chance against a gamer challenger in the Norton.

From our first sips of each wine, Marc and I looked at each other and knew.  Well I looked at him, I think he was writing down his estimated brix at harvest for each wine as part of his scoring system.

The Malbec was big and jammy on the nose, yes, but as I’ve said ad naseum before, big fruity nosed wines often disappoint on the palate, not living up to what you anticipate from having your olfactory glands massaged by some big, brassy broad.  What impressed about the Argentine was its structure, that balance all the way through that to me is the hallmark of great wine, at any price point.

The Talus hung as close as possible but found themselves down by 16 at the half, 55-39.

The second half was more of the same, each time the Pinot got close with some mild and enjoyable fruit, I’d take a sip of what I had surely indentified as the Malbec, and heard Patti Lupone singing in my ear.

The game was never really as close as the final score:

Bodega Norton 84, Talus 74

So the plucky wine from South America has made it all the way to the big dance on Monday.  And earned its trip every step of the way.

Published in: on April 4, 2009 at 2:52 pm  Comments (1)  

Future(s) Shock

crystal-ballWine Futures, or put another way, paying for  the privilege of owning a wine years before it will ever see the inside of a bottle, have been taking a hit lately, as more and more people (noticeably cash poor) are foregoing this practice in favor of, oh, what’s the word…sanity maybe.

For years the major French wine houses – and even some cult brands here in the States -  have sold their wine to willing consumers well before their release date as a way to not only raise capital for these expensive wines but I say also as one more example of snobbery in belonging to an elite club of folks for whom money was clearly no object.

And now that the economic landscape continues to flow along with the speed of continental shelf drift, suddenly the idea of spending one’s money on something that doesn’t quite exist, no longer seems like such a good idea.

Shockingly perhaps, I’m amazed that other industries did not catch on to this practice and use it for their own gain.  You know,  walk into a Best Buy ready to plunk down $1500.00 on a new flat screen and as the helpful salesman rings you up for the full price he says, “Here’s your receipt.  We hope to be shipping these TV’s by 2013.  And boy is it going to be worth the wait.”

You’d go for that transaction right?

What I love about this story is that once again this financial mess is righting the world on its proper axis.  Or am I the only fool who expects to physically get something when I buy it?

Yes, wine does take time to mature properly, even to merely allow it to attain a quality that warrants it reaching a consumer’s hand.  And yes, many of these wines are of the blue chip variety that are sometimes bought and sold like stocks (and we all know how good that’s going).

But there’s a certain arrogance that comes from profiting on your product, a cash advance if you will, on simply the promise that said product will deliver everything its advertised to be.  Again, imagine not  being able to test drive a car before you drove it off the lot.  Wouldn’t happen. Couldn’t happen.

As a wine consumer I have expectations that a certain wine in a certain year will be of great quality.  Hey for many of these fine wines and their equally fine winemakers, the wines in question will be decent in even sub par years.

So I’ll tell you what, I’ll buy your wines when they’re released.  As for the cash you need to make them, well, that’s going to have to come out of your pocket.  And I’m happy others are starting to feel the same way.

Published in: on April 2, 2009 at 10:55 am  Leave a Comment  

Grape Madness – Round Three (Cost Plus Bracket)

number4_openAnd then there were four.

After two weekends of tasting thirty-two wines, the inaugural Grape Madness event is down to four worthy champions.

One last match-up, in my own Cost Plus bracket, to complete the Final Four and set up a dual-city tasting that will crown the first ever Grape Madness champ.

(2) The Show versus (3) Bodega Norton

I’m too lazy to research this fully but I think The Show was picked by far the most to come out of  the Cost Plus bracket and sure enough it did.  I had only heard about this wine recently and then promptly forgot about it, but as I said when the tournament opened and I found myself in the aisles at Cost Plus, something about the bottle itself just hit the right emotional buttons.  And  the juice did not disappoint.  It methodically made its way through each game not with flash, like some Tampa Bay Buccaneer, one year winning it all, the next four missing the playoffs.  No, The Show was more like my beloved Eagles, in every game, winning most of them.  In the end, would it make a city proud, or crush our hopes and dreams again, like some overworked dad, home too late to tuck us kids into bed and read us a story?

The Bodega on the other hand came in unknown and proceeded to pump out the highest consistent scores in this bracket.  After making short order with another nice CA Cab (337), it crushed the #1 seed killing Aussie handily to find itself in the Elite Eight.  Regardless of the outcome, everyone would know their name now.

The Bulldozer from Mendozer raced out to a lead with a big, jammy nose that like or or not, I like.  But The Show did what champions do, chipping away at the Malbec’s lead with a floral, fruity nose of its own, surprisingly mild for a young-ish Cabernet.

Halftime – Bodega 46, The Show, 41.

As the wines opened up in the third quarter, The Show earned its name by displaying a great balance,  soft fruit and just a hint of acidity, turning the tables on the Bodega, which seemed to have more fruit on the nose than on the palate.

Third Quarter – The Show, 63, Bodega 60.

Marc and I tasted and retasted these two wines, going back and forth on which one we liked best (not the same one again), and sure enough the fourth quarter was a low scoring affair. A last second missed jump shot by the Show sent this game into overtime, the first one of the tournament.

It would be a costly miss.

The teams came out for the extra stanza cautious.  The wines continued to open up and mellow but the Malbec started showing more than the Cab, which had slowed, perhaps its close, opening round games catching up.  The Show was getting tired.

With 42 seconds left to play and The Show up by one, 81-80, Bodega and its younger 2007 fruit took the ball up the court and promptly made a quick bucket (82-81, Bodega).  The Show called time out but as anyone in the crowd of two will tell you, they did not come back on the floor with a plan to win.

The inbounds pass was stolen, along with the hopes of many, who picked it to go all the way.

Final Score – Bodega Norton 82, The Show 81

And then there were four:  Bodega Norton Malbec, Talus Pinot Noir, Steven Vincent Meritage and Chateau Chevalier Cab

This has been a great ride so far.  Can’t wait to see what happens in the Finals.

Published in: on March 29, 2009 at 9:05 am  Comments (1)  

Grape Madness – Round Three (BevMo Bracket)

crowLast I checked the Grape Madness Scoreboard I was sitting pretty in third place, one of only five people whose pick to win it all still remained.  Yet it is with great humility that I acknowledge that this success did not come as a result of the BevMo bracket.  In fact, the two wines that made it out were my anticipated losers, showing once and for all that you have to be lucky sometimes too.

(3) 2007 Talus Pinot Noir versus (3) 2007 Penfolds Rawsons Retreat

For some reason I’ve always thought of Talus as a so-so brand, probably because it’s the kind of thing my wife will bring home when she heads to Ralph’s after work.  You know, the type of bottle that’s usually found on the close out table alongside a marked down jar of spicy pickles or those fried crunchy onions that only sell during the Thanksgiving season.

I may have been totally wrong about this assessment but my mind has a way of saying, “There’s no way The Devil Wears Prada is going to be a good film.” But then I see it and really like it.

As for the Rawson’s Retreat, I bagged on Marc prior to the tourney, calling it the poor step-cousin of Penfold’s other Cab/Shiraz offering, the Koonunga Hill, which I’ve always liked.

So when both of these wines came out on top during his first and second round tastings, the taste on my palate was crow (it’s just like chicken!).

This next round of competition was tough, as we now had to match our own subjective likes and dislikes against one another .  Marc, in his usual MIT scientist meets The Galloping Gourmet way had a pre-printed, seemingly thousand point scoring chart, covering everything from brix level to region, from varietal to ph.

I had a white sheet of paper pulled from my printer.

Still the games are played in the glass and both wines showed well, with noticeable fruit on the nose, red for the Aussie, black for the Pinot.  And both showed nice subdued balance throughout, though the Talus was a bit tannic, which for me kept the RR on top at the half.

Each of us tried the wines several times, going back and forth between the glasses and I was pretty sure we were both going to pick different wines.  And of course we did.  But in the end after letting the wines open up even further, someone has to move on and someone has to go home.

After scoring them both, the loser has a much longer flight, that they should travel with heads held high, back to the land down under.

Talus 74, Penfold’s 71 (again, these are basketball type scores, not wine ratings)

Stay tuned for Sunday’s matchup between The Show from Californ-ia and pesky small forward from Argentina, Bodega Norton.

Published in: on March 27, 2009 at 11:53 am  Leave a Comment  

The Super Market 3.0

img_1333I was hoping to find a subject to write about as a break from the rigors of Grape Madness and truth be told it’s a topic I had started formulating in my head a few weeks ago and forgot about it, until  I opened today’s Times.

Once again the subject of selling wine in supermarkets is on the checkout stand in New York.  And although the person flying the flag the highest, Tom Wark at Fermentation will most certainly write about this with more passion and eloquence than me (if he hasn’t already), I’m continually mystified by the fact that as a person in the business of selling wine, some consumers, depending on geography, simply cannot buy it.

Thanks, America.

Growing up in and around New York City, I was not aware that one could not buy wine in a grocery store, mostly because we did not drink wine at my house.  So when I moved to California and saw wine on the shelves at the then Westward Ho market (now a Whole Foods), across from my apartment building, I suppose I always assumed you could buy it everywhere.

Not the case in my home state though, where a powerful political cabal of distributors, liquor stores and of course religious folk are fighting a proposal by Governor Patterson to raise revenue by allowing grocery stores to sell wine.

I mean, what man of the cloth doesn’t want to be seen going into Freddy’s Liquors on 46th & 9th?

The late (unbelievably) great, Bill Hicks used to say that the only reason the two most destructive drugs, tobacco and alcohol were legal was that they were the only two the government made money on.  He’s right.  But then how come wine is not as easily obtainable where hopefully responsible ADULTS can buy it alongside the liquid motherlode, beer?

The argument that allowing people to buy wine at a grocery store will put independent liquor stores out of business sounds so  tired these days that they may as well make the old crotchety guy on his lawn yelling at the neighborhood kids their spokesperson.  Need these retailers look any further than the states around them (Hi New Jersey) to see that it should always be about convenience for the customer?

A quaint concept to be sure, you know, allowing the people who keep your lights on the ability to buy everything they need in one place.  And the follow up argument is, well, if they can sell wine, let us sell cheese, because really, what better place to buy aged Gouda than a liquor store.

In fairness, I do see some of their argument, but it’s the same argument made by independent bookstores against Amazon and the local hardware store against Home Depot and yet I drive through LA everyday and see signs of life from both.  Just as there are signs that both are in trouble in 2009.

Last I checked the country was in a bit of a financial downturn.  Isn’t it time to allow businesses to make money selling legal products to legally appropriate consumers where ever they may roam?

Doesn’t get anymore Land of the Free than that…

Published in: on March 25, 2009 at 11:52 am  Leave a Comment  

Grape Madness – Round Two

17fb095fde4f77be My stinky palate and I went into Round Two feeling pretty good about the results so far.  The moral minority had spoken, questioning foul calls, screaming about illegal defenses and even suggesting that a late three pointer should have only been a two since part of the players shoelace had actually grazed the line.

But wine does not often lie when it comes to blind tasting and while some would rather take the word of others over their own judgements, I call them as I taste them.

First round action saw two upsets, one close win for the underdog and a favorite advance, making the second set of tastings a real pick ‘em when it came down to what would happen on the court.  Here’s a recap of these exciting matchups.

(3) Bodega Norton Malbec versus (4) Aaku Cabernet Sauvignon

On paper this was a close one going in.  Two lower priced wines, one from South America, one from Australia, both generally fruit forward offerings, which are often times hard to judge against each other.

The Aaku continued to slow it down early, with its unusually vegetative and earthy nose, allowing the Malbec with its red fruit  showing well, to jump out to an early 24-14 lead.  The mid palate for the Argentine showed good structure and fruit while the Aussie, so minimally tannic in the early round, tightened up, perhaps simple rookie nerves, finding themselves on the bigger stage with far more to lose this time out.  Norton at halftime, 46-32.

The Aaku came out in the second half, seemingly playing for pride only.  It took no chances, showing a little fruit on a finish that still felt dry.  Their prevent defense against a wine whose low tannins and great balance only prevented the Cab from winning.

The Malbec runs away in the second half like Secretariat at Belmont in ’73.

Bodega Norton 82, Aaku 65

(2) The Show versus (4) Pinot Evil

The Show came into the second round on a roll.  Many had picked them to win it all and it came out strong against Talia Rosso and never looked back.

This time around they did not know what to expect.  They had never seen Pinot Evil before, a wine that only three short years ago was playing Division II under a pesky head coach known only at that time  for a series of recruiting violations.

But no French Pinot cannot be taken lightly as Baron De Magana found out, further solidifying the Franco-Spanish feuding that’s been going on for hundreds of years.

The Show, and its brash young Americaness, pressed hard in the opening minutes, “showing” great color but a minty, musty nose that reminded one of old Wrigley’s chewing gum.  Maybe the larger stage was spooking them too. The Pinot showed its first round performance was no fluke, with a nose of rasberries and coffee.

Both wines showed nice fruit and balance through the middle of the game but the Pinot, its smaller players with something to prove held a slim lead at the half, 42-40.

The wines battled back an forth throughout the second half, finishing the third quarter deadlocked at 59.

For me and my (Warner Bros-esque) palate though, wine is all about structure and balance.  It’s what separates a great winemaker from simply a good one.  And it’s often what makes the difference between a $5.00 & $12.00 bottle of wine.

The Show delivered down the stretch not only a balance that was noticeable throughout the game but also told me that this was a wine that could have played another full game that night, while the French wine, however game, had run its course.

The Show 75, Pinot Evil 70

So the controversial Cost Plus Bracket end with two solid wine in the Elite Eight:

(2) The Show versus (3) Bodega Norton

What’s your bracket look like???

Published in: on March 23, 2009 at 9:01 am  Comments (1)  

Grape Madness – Round One, Part Two

42070d39a88b8-71-1Editors Note:  My scoring system for Grape Madness is meant to resemble basketball scores, not globally recognized wine critics who write newsletters or publish in major magazine’s scores…

The upper tier of our Grape Madness brackets have been completed and immediately there’s been some controversy.  We had comments from people (and when I say people, I mean one person) – but I’m thrilled someone is paying enough attention to call out the Ombudsman on us humble wine bloggers.

Yes, the first round brought some surprises, lower than expected scores, in my case upsets, but that’s the nature of blind tasting.  And it’s what I find so amazing when reading wine reviews by the aforementioned experts.  No doubt they’ve got better palates than I do, know more about the process of taste and proper criticism, yet I’m often mystified that the wines on the surface you’d expect would get monster scores all seem to deliver on the page.  Hmmmm.

But take heart sports fans (and if the girls in this photo are reading my blog please say hello – as a fellow Eagles fan I know exactly what you’re feeling.)  If your favorite wine lost, suck it up and look forward to next year.  That’s what us Birds fans always do…

(Cue ESPN music):  But now it’s off to the hardwoods for some more Grape Madness action from last night:

(2) 337 Cabernet Sauvignon ($10.00) versus (3) Bodega Norton Malbec ($8.00)

After the low scoring in the first set of match-ups (and by low scoring, I mean in basketball terms, Danny), these next two games offered the hope of some serious chucking from three point land.

I’ve really been impressed with just about every Argentine Malbec I’ve tasted in the past few years, everything from the $2.99 La Boca (found at TJ’s) to more expensive versions of this big varietal.  Then again, I also know first hand what the 337 grape clone can do in the glass so I had high hopes for the Lodi appelated wine that uses it as its name.

Both wines exhibited fresh notes on the nose, the Malbec, raspeberries, the Cab a minty chocolatly thing not unlike the Girl Scout cookies I was strong-armed into buying last weekend.  But where the wines parted ways was on the mid palate where the 337 did not offer up much in the way of fruit (something I look for – your mileage may vary), while the Argentinian, not lush by any means displayed a balance of fruit that created a more satisfying finish.

Norton 82, 337, 76 (and by 82-76, I mean a basketball score, a close game that could have went either way but in the end, free throws made the difference)

(2) The Show ($13.00) versus (3) Talia Rosso ($7.00)

The last time the US and Italy met was the 2006 World Cup in front of 46,000 at Fritz-Walter Stadion, Kaiserslautern, Germany.  That match ended in a 1-1 tie (and the world wonders why we don’t like soccer).

This match up, drank before four fans in Encino, CA held much more excitement I assure you.

The Show lived up to it’s name and came out very strong, with a smoky, bacony nose that I must say was pleasing to this fifteen year veteran vegetarian.  I don’t normally like the smell of frying swine but I enjoyed this.  And yet the Rosso pressed back with some smoke of its own.

Both wines were a bit tight and tannic with nicely balanced finishes and headed to the locker rooms tied at the half.  But after a little bit more time in the glass, The Show, perhaps with a slightly conscious evaluation that it was a more age worthy wine, came out on top.

The Show 74, Talia Rosso 69

So the Cost Plus First Round bracket ends with some upsets and some higher seeds advancing.  Nothing to complain about there.

The Next Round looks like this:

(4) Aaku Cabernet Sauvignon versus (3) Bodega Norton Malbec &  (4) Pinot Evil versus (2) The Show

Hope you’ll all stick around for next week!!!

Published in: on March 20, 2009 at 9:54 am  Comments (4)  

Grape Madness – Round One

nl011Like Clay over Liston three days before I was born in ’65, Marissa Tomei over Joan Plowright at the Oscars in 1993 and Princeton defeating UCLA in 1996 (that one’s for you Jason), upsets have captivated crowds since some Gladiator took down a lion at the Coliseum in ’2.

And yet I went into the first round of my Grape Madness bracket confident the higher seeds would prevail.

Here’s how real life played out…

(1) Edge Cabernet Sauvignon ($19.00) versus (4) Aaku Cabernet Sauvignon ($4.00)

It was the battle of the Cabs, Northern versus Southern Hemisphere, 2006 versus 2005.

On paper this was a mismatch, but as Vince Lombardi once said, the games are played on the field, or court, or I don’t even know if Lombardi said this.

The Edge came out strong, with a big, berry nose that pressed the Aaku’s green pepper all over the court.  By halftime though the minimal tannins of the Aussie made up a lot of ground on the tightness of the Napa Cab.  But the Edge still led with five minutes to play in a low scoring affair but could not convert its free throws, showing Aaku a glimmer of hope.

They called timeout with eleven seconds to go all tied up at 65.  Couldn’t have asked for a better chance to win this and not take any chances with overtime.  And as Cinderella stories go, the dry and slightly tight finish for the Edge could not stave off a clear shot from the corner by Aaku.  Nothing but net.

Aaku 68, Edge 65

(1) Baron De Magana ($18.00) versus (4) Pinot Evil  ($5.00)

Spain took on France in this first round matchup of 1 & 4 seeds.  2004 was a mixed year in Spain with weather alternating between miserable and almost perfect for grape growing.  And yet Baron did not start well, its barnyardy nose allowing the Pinot to jump out to a surprising but early 22-11 lead.

The mid palate on both wines was better, with the Pinot showing nice balance for the price point and the earthy nose of the Spaniard giving way to some decent black fruit.  At halftime the crowd was restless and feeling another upset in the making as Evil lead 48-38.

They say that defense wins championships in most sports and a smothering press in the second half, coupled with continued balance throughout never let Baron back in the game.

Pinot Evil 75, Baron De Magana, 66

Two games in, two BIG, surprising upsets.

As Clay said in ’65, “I shook up the world.”  And today, two little wines did too…

Stay tuned for second half of the Cost Plus bracket tomorrow

Published in: on March 19, 2009 at 7:25 pm  Comments (2)  
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.