Sometimes I'm amazed at reviews I read. I remember the WS, imo, hitting the nail on the head with '00 Pine Ridge Dijon Clones Chardonnay while the WA missed the ball.

In today's mail, I received the latest copy of the WA, and I must agree completely with them on their review of the 2002 Wehlener Sonnenuhr Auslese from JJ Prum. I think WS tasted a different wine. I believe the WS gave this a 94 and the WA an 89. This is no 94 point wine by any stretch of my vivid imagination. Parker says this wine may "disappoint those who look for German wines with zest and grip." The 2001, imo, is far superior to the 2002 because of its crisp intensity. The 2002 is a little flabby in comparison.

Btw, Germany is reviewed by Rovani, Parker does Ca, Bordeaux, Australia, and the Rhone. Piere does pretty much everything else.

There's a lot of angles on this one.

First off, I thought Pierre did a terrible job on his 2002 German reviews. (This will be no news to him, as he already is aware of how little respect I have for his German wine tasting skills.) The range of wines was incredibly narrow, his usage of "CORKED" in his scoring is cruel and unusual punishment. (Sure there are many corked German wines, but that's best left for his ranting in the lead in article like he did last year. Procure another sample & retaste.) To top it off, the new practice of only writing up wines that got an 89 or better (notice all the 88s and lower were just listed as "other wines tasted") just makes the resource that much less useful.

Using that as a context, I think the true quality of the 2002 Prum Auslese lies somewhere in between the WS and WA scores. (I actually have more respect for Sanderson than Rovani in this arena, but that's not saying much...more rant coming sometime.) The '01 was unusually forward and bright for a Prum auslese, with so much material it was able to blow out of the usual Prum shell that keeps the wines from being truly fun to drink for their first 10-15 years. The '02 is typical Prum. That being said, the '01 is a monumental wine that can be laid down for the grandchildren (well...your grandchildren...not mine), where the '02 will only last a mere 20-25 years IMO. Gee, isn't that terrible.

This is one of those cases where scoring does not truly tell the story. THe '02 is classic German Riesling Auslese. As such it's a solidly outstanding wine. It just can't compare to the '01, which is a monument to the variety, and was actually scored too low by both Sanderson and Rovani last year(if the '01 Graacher Himmelreich was a 99 then the '01 Wehlener Sonnenuhr should have been a 103 !). It actually is unfair to compare these wines, as they are totally different beasts. The '02 needs time to come out of its shell, where the '01 burst through like Bill Bixby when he got angry.

Paker does Spain as well.

jb

Well, Rf, I must disagree with your calling the '02 "solidly outstanding." I also don't think it has the acidity to last 20-25 years. It reminds me of the 1976 Moselles, attractive in their youth, but not built for the long haul.

Well, I have no empirical basis to dispute that, but the 2001 is a crisper, more balanced wine to me. Someday, we'll have to sit down together with a bottle of each and slug it out.

J.J. Prum WS's are tough wines to judge. I find them easier to judge in weak vintages since they should their real self earlier.

I have to correct one criticism of Rovani that I made. He did mention CO2 in the Christoffel's. I have to agree that some (the spatlese and Kabinett in particular) did have some, but I couldn't understand why he thought that this would be a detrement, so I misunderstood what he wrote.

In my monthly visit to eBob, I noticed that Parker mentioning that tasting jobs at WS pay in excess of $100,000. I wonder what he pays Rovani?

GATC, have you tried the '01 and '02 Auslese? If so, what is your opinion of them?