Dr. Harry Oldman on replacing Jeb Dunnuck in the Wine Advocate

Dr. Harry Oldman has been quiet for quite sometime here on the blog, but he hasn't quit quite yet. His last appearance was his rant on Andy Warhol wines a little over two years ago. He recently asked if he could respond to the paparazzi rumor mill about his supposed impending employment at a renowned wine publication (other than this one). I don't normally dabble in speculation, but I figure I should give the old man a chance to set the record straight.

It may seem as if I have been laying low for awhile now, but I actually been working real hard in the wine industry. I was quite surprised that I was able to gain employment in the wine industry with my background as a blogger. We all know wine bloggers never amount to anything in the wine industry.

Ever since January 21, I've been working as communications director and press secretary for a major East Coast winery. I know what you're thinking - East Coast wine is an oxymoron, kind of like affordable Napa Cab or affordable health care. But after working at the highest levels of the greatest winery on Earth, I've had change of heart - granted it was a medically necessary heart transplant - about non-California wines.

I was having dinner with my friends Jared and Sergei one evening last December when they told me that their boss' hand-picked personal assistant wanted me to be the public face of his I mean his son's winery. I've been busy ever since giving daily briefings to the Atlantic Coast wine media. I've of course banned all cameras and bloggers (No Fake Media Allowed) from attending, but Jim Acosta and Jay McInerney, who is usually drunk or high, show up everyday. I suppose dealing with these two losers is a part of making wine great again.

I've been amazed with how I've gone from being a retired computational physicist to being stalked by the wine paparazzi on the Interwebs. This rise of epic porportions almost didn't happen. I remember the day so clearly. August 22, 2016. That was the day I lost one of my best friends. He was there one day and gone the next. At my age it is bound to happen, but when a moderately notorious wine writer decides to stop writing about wine to write about Crooked Hillary it is a dark, dark day. I almost gave up wine myself. I was in a funk - thank god it wasn't a 12% Contra Costa Carignan-type funk - but an emotional funk that cracking open my 15-yr vertical of Harlan Estate was able to break. That's what friends like Jared and Sergei are for. Without them opening this backchannel for me I wouldn't be in the position I am in today.

And what position is that exactly? Well, approximately 12 people in the entire country have seen my name mentioned over on WineBerserkers.com as  the likely replacement for Jeb Dunnuck's beat in Robert Parker's Wine Advocate. Apparently Jeb decided that he actually wanted to review wine for consumers instead of traveling the world in the Singapore Dog, Pony and Wine Show. And what a pony he was. But now the speculation has turned to who will fill the heir apparent's shoes. Funny how my name got thrown into the mix. We must find the leakers! This is a big deal! Word even spread to the Robert Parker Bulletin Board. Now 14 people suspect that the one and only Dr. Harry Oldman will fill the bung-sized void to review the wines of Central California and the Rhône Valley.

Can you imagine a world in which that would actually happen? Oh boy, watch out when old Dr. Oldman strikes pen to paper in the fully made-over print editions with full-color photos, with over 25% more tasting notes and articles. I will personally guarantee that my writing will be more than 25% more colorful! If you thought the feud between the Hosemaster and Levi Dalton was epic, just you wait. I once saved Wine Spectator, why not add one more American literary icon to my resume?

Despite how much sense this move would make, I must deny this speculation. Seeing as I was instrumental in helping drive the creative direction of this site, it is possible I could have done the same for another even more prestigious wine publication. I can confidently say that I've been a wine journalist, editor and taster for over a decade and am a regular wine panelist, speaker and educator for events and organizations worldwide. Those qualifications alone would make me qualified to replace Jeb. Writing alongside Bob would give me a bigger podium from which to mock those who mock he who shall not be mocked.

No, Dr. Harry Oldman will not be replacing Jeb Dunnuck. Joe Czerwinski, former managing editor of Wine Enthusiast will be the new reviewer in Monkton. He will fit the corporate environment and bow down to the Master herself. For all those claiming end of days at the Wine Advocate better eat their shorts now. The ship has been righted and Joe will help Bob regain the glory of the early 1990s. This morning there is joy in Mudville! This all being said, I will not deny that I will not be joining the Wine Advocate in some capacity in the future. I better get back to my podium, I see McInerney waking up from his nap.

I will let the tweets speak for themselves.

Dr. Harry Oldman has a Surprise Holiday Interview...

Dr. Harry Oldman generously unwraps a spectacular interview for us on this Boxing Day.

Kyle, as an old white man with a beard, I felt that it was only appropriate that I give you and your readers a present this year, but I couldn't quite figure out what would be a good gift. Then it dawned on me! I'm friends with a moderately notorious wine critic and we talk fairly often about wine and life in general. He was kind enough to answer the kind of tough questions no one has ever had the balls to ask him. I felt like Katie Couric! He didn't know that I was going to publish the interview, and I don’t want to name names because I don’t have his permission, so I'll just refer to him as SHhh (as in I'll never tell!). You can guess, but I'll never reveal my source!

HARRY: Hey, buddy! Thanks for agreeing to answer some questions. I know how much you hate answering questions, so this really means a lot to me!

SHhh: No problem, anything for you Harry. I actually love to answer questions, almost as much as asking questions! I write for the consumer, first, foremost and always. So when my readers engage with me, I make it a point to always respond. I learn so much from my readers! Blogs and bulletin boards are supposed to be back-and-forths, right? I mean, we live in this new age of participatory journalism. It is not uncommon for me to comment on other blogs, too!

Sommelier Journal suspends publication

The world of writing has lost one of the best outlets for current, interesting and useful information pertaining to wine. Minutes ago, Sommelier Journal announced that it has "suspended publication." Perhaps the magazine is not completely dead as David Vogels, former editor and publisher of Sommelier Journal, said in the letter sent to its contributors (which includes yours truly), that his team is "currently negotiating with a group that hopes to purchase the title and resume publishing the magazine at some point within the next year." Subscribers will have the remainder of their subscriptions fulfilled by Wine & Spirits Magazine.

I contributed four articles (see other articles) and had several more scheduled for 2014, so this news comes as a shock and a disappointment to me personally. Though the magazine's intended audience was industry professionals, I thought many of the stories and profiles were great for general consumers and knowledgeable enthusiasts. Sommelier Journal wasn't beholden to advertisers (perhaps why it struggled economically) and that showed with its diverse stories on all things wine, spirits and beer. No region or wine was too small, unknown or unheralded to warrant attention. I think that openness is what made Sommelier Journal one of the better wine publications for learning something new rather than hearing the same thing repeated annually.

I can only hope that it is sold and rebooted, and I think the industry will be a better place if that were to happen. I can only speculate that Wine & Spirits is involved (based on the fact that they are honoring remaining SJ subscriptions and that Vogels recommends contacting Josh Greene at Wine & Spirits or Neil Beckett at The World of Fine Wine for pitching stories that were promised to SJ), but do not know for sure. If they are, it would be interesting to see how Sommelier Journal would fit into a roster of wine publications a la M. Shanken Publications. Again, that is only speculation.

The main matter of concern with the loss of Sommelier Journal is that it decreases the number of voices. One of the best parts of the wine writing world today is the shear number of diverse opinions, voices and opportunities for spreading information. Fewer paying, print publications is a bad thing for writers and readers. Sommelier Journal recently tried to take the leap digitally and expand services online, but apparently the the lack of advertisers and the small subscription base was not large enough to support the operation. Perhaps this was the reason that Wine Advocate (which did not accept paid advertisements) took on investors. Wine Enthusiast and Wine Spectator both must obviously make a fair profit from their advertisements. I'm not claiming that Sommelier Journal was as large or as influential as those major publications, but it was no less important and that is something to be sad about.

Guest post from my extern

I've turned this post over to my friend and psuedo-mentor, Harry Oldman.

Dr. Oldman has been in the wine business for decades. He used to be a computational physicist at a national laboratory in New Mexico, involved in computational fluid dynamics of wine. But after getting sidetracked on a trip to California by Randall Grahm, he has never been the same.

He shares his thoughts and opinions on wine and wine writing on various online wine boards, but I of course don't listen to what he has to say (you know, with me being a Millennial and all).

Since 1WineDude and The Hosemaster of Wine^TM have occasionally handed their blogs over to their interns, I figured I’d open my blog to this extern. Plus, this will allow me to put in extra hours on social media and get my beauty rest all at the same time.

So, with out any further ado, here is Dr. Oldman:

The most interesting, imaginative and intelligent wine publication...

There are lots of wine publications floating around, both in paper and digital formats. Decanter, Wine Spectator, Wine Enthusiast and Wine Advocate are probably considered the most influential and most dominant wine glossies aimed at consumers. Though they all contain articles about people, places and various lifestyle topics, their raison d'être is reviewing wine and distilling the wine down to a numerical shorthand (all now use the 100-point system) that supposedly corresponds to quality. The editors may claim that the score is secondary to the actual review, but those periodicals are most cited by consumers and retailers in connection with just the ratings, often times with the actual arbiter of the score detached from his or her decree.

Maybe Steve Heimoff was right (I might have lost my mind...)

After giving it a week of thought, I'm going to argue something with which, on the surface, I adamantly disagree. Last week, my digital buddy, Steve Heimoff, wrote a blog post titled, "Saying Goodbye to the Golden Age of Wine Writing." His thesis was that with the rise of the "Age of Digital Information" (i.e., wine blogs) wine writers are finding it more and more difficult to earn a living writing about wine. He claims that the world of wine writing is no longer the utopia it was when he got into this profession and made a name for himself (I'd argue he actually has made his name via his blog and not as the California Editor for Wine Enthusiast Magazine). David White penned a great response to Steve's assertions and claimed that things are actually getting better in the world of wine writing. I wholeheartedly agree with David, but I want to take a deeper look into Steve's post.

Is the 100-pt system more confusing than helpful?

Proponents of the 100-pt system for often claim that the main advantage of the system is that it provides consumers with a clear, concise and relative measure of a wine's intrinsic quality. The problem with that statement is that a wine's intrinsic quality is completely subjective. Every person is born with a unique palate and a distinct set of experiences from which to conjure aroma and flavor comparisons from memory (how else does one know what an "intense sensation of ... gunflint" tastes like? Those experiences also make relative scoring inherently flawed. Do you enjoy green tobacco or do you find it off-putting? Acidity, oh don't start a debate about acidity amongst wine writers! Sure, one person's opinion is easily defensible, but when two (or more) prominent wine publications diverge dramatically on their assessment of a wine (more often than you would expect), the result for consumers could be more confusing than helpful.

An antagonistic approach (a reputation you get when you question authority)

This weekend, a colleague of mine introduced me to a friend of his at the third annual Colorado Urban Winefest. Part of his introduction include a reference to my wine writing. He referred to me as an "antagonistic blogger." Both of those terms are used pejoratively in the world of wine writing. Now I have no problem being called a blogger. I write about wine on this blog. I have also contributed to Palate Press, Sommelier Journal, Wine Spectator and Decanter. So I am a wine blogger, and I also consider myself a wine writer.

A Good Wine Seldom Mentioned Is Soon Forgotten

As I begin to read Doug Shafer's A Vineyard in Napa, a motto he attributes to his father, John, and founder of the renowned Shafer Vineyards made me think of the current debate about the state of wine criticism. "A good wine seldom mentioned is soon forgotten." To me, this maxim speaks volumes to me about how both we as writers/critics and consumers talk about wine.

Steve Heimoff doesn't like me...

Last week, Steve Heimoff wrote a book review of two new books. In the review, he accused Jancis Robinson and Linda Murphy of receiving money for placing labels in their soon-to-be-released American Wine. He also gets in a bit of name-calling as he says Robinson's name is "over-exposed," but that is not my fight to fight. Though I do not agree with is opinion of the content of the book, he is more than welcome to it. However, Heimoff seems content to only make mention the California regions he surrounds himself with, and I have to wonder (I’m just raising the question, not making any allegations) if Heimoff actually read the whole book. It is pretty sleezy to review a book without actually reading it.

Of wine writers and idiots

A few days ago, I read something that both puzzled and impressed me. Steve Heimoff wrote a rambling article about the Alma Wine Academy and orange wines. What caught my attention was that Steve professed his ignorance of this rather unusual, and small category of wines. Orange wines actually have a long history, but they have seen an increased awareness in the media (and not just no-name bloggers like me but big hitters like Ray Isle and Eric Asimov) for more than a few years. Sure, these skin-macerated white wines, often aged in clay amphora, are not the next-big-thing in the wine world that even my mother knows about, but they're not a new, unknown phenomenon.

I figured, and so did a lot of other readers, that a "fairly well-known, a big fish" like Steve would be in the know. However, I was even more impressed that Steve was willing to share his ignorance with his readers. It is not too often that the biggest names in the wine writing world admit that they don't know something. It takes a lot of confidence to undermine one's expertise. If only more critics would admit when they get something wrong or don't know something, we'd all trust them a bit more. Well done, Steve.

The fallacy of the 100-point system revealed

Yesterday, Steve Heimoff assessed the current state of the 2010 California pinot noirs on his blog. Steve said of the 110 or so pinot noirs that he had tasted the scores ranged from 94 "all the way down to a miserable 80." I don't know about you, but to me (and to Steve's employer) a score in the low 80s (80-82) indicates that a wine is an acceptable wine, especially "in casual, less-critical circumstances." I don't consider an 80 a great score, but I wouldn't consider it miserable. Steve's statement reflects what I would consider the core of the score inflation problem. Grade inflation does not mean all scores are going up (as Blake Gray et al. suggest), just that the meaning of scores has changed. In the not so distant past, a grade of a "C" in college was considered an “average” grade. Now, many students believe it means outright failure. I teach at a local university and see this with my students. Every student thinks that they are an "A" student, but in reality few are. I suppose the same is true with wineries. They all think that they produce 90+ point wines, but few actually do. There is nothing wrong with making average wine, but apparently Steve Heimoff thinks that there is. Unfortunately, this is only the beginning of the problem.

When I commented on the post, Steve replied: " I would not use the word “miserable” in a formal review. But let’s face it, an 80 is interpreted as miserable by just about everyone. So when I comment on my own scores, I can be more descriptive, especially if I don’t identify the wine in question, which I would never do out of respect." So, is Wine Enthusiast’s rating scale a joke because when they rate a wine as acceptable, the editors actually believe it is "miserable?" On the surface, an 80 may seem like an average score, but if the critic doesn't actually believe that an 80-point wine is acceptable, then what is the score really worth.

I understand that Steve probably meant that a score of 80 will not be welcomed by most wineries as being helpful, and he is probably correct. But, if Steve takes wineries' feelings into consideration when he reviews wine how are we supposed to believe what he writes? Steve will apparently write psuedo-nice things about a wine out of respect, but when he doesn't have to identify the wine he can let everyone know that he really thinks it is miserable. This is not really breaking news and most people know that ratings are just a big game wine pundits play, but I’m kind of surprised to hear Steve Heimoff actually admit to the fallacy of the 100-point system. Bravo, Mr. Heimoff!

Colorado Wine Shines in the National Spotlight

April 2011 might have been a very big month for Colorado wine. At the beginning of the month, the purveyors of DrinkLocalWine.com announced that the 4th annual Drink Local Wine Conference will be coming to Colorado in 2012. Dallas wine blogger Jeff Siegel (the Wine Curmudgeon) and Washington Post wine columnist Dave McIntyre created the site to promote the quality of the wines, grapes, flavors and opportunities offered by regional wines. This conference will bring several dozen wine writers from around the country to Colorado in order to explore all that is Colorado wine. Writers will tour wineries, taste Colorado's vinous delights and take part in a "Twitter Taste-Off" where attendees will taste and tweet about their favorite Colorado wines. This conference could do a lot to show the world what Colorado grapes have to offer.

Not only was that announcement a move in the right direction for the Colorado wine industry, several weeks later, wine personality Gary Vaynerchuk,  made his way to the Centennial State to promote his new book, The Thank You Economy. At the book signing, Vaynerchuk, formerly of WineLibraryTV.com and currently appearing on DailyGrape.com, was given a bottle of Guy Drew Vineyards' 2007 Metate by an enthusiastic guest at the Tattered Cover Bookstore in Denver. The following day before his trek to Boulder, Vaynerchuk taped episode 26 of his Daily Grape (see video below) while tasting the bottle of Colorado wine. After briefly describing Colorado's wine history, Vaynerchuk sampled this blend of cabernet sauvignon and syrah and was blown away by its quality. Hundreds of fans commented on this video and many were interested in where they could find wines from Colorado. Drew, according to a Grand Junction Sentinel article, has already sold 10 cases of the 300 case production offering to viewers of the video across the country. Other wine writers, including ColoradoWino and Sourgrapes, have cited the Vaynerchuk video in their posts. When major wine personalities like Vaynerchuk take note of Colorado's wines, consumers will reap the benefits.



Unfortunately, not everyone is buying what Colorado is selling. In a conversation in the comments section on one of Steve Heimoff's blog posts, Steve states that he was in Colorado several years ago and "found most of the wines inferior." He also claims that the reason he doesn't review Colorado wines is because no one pays him to do so. He fails to realize that many consumers may actually be interested in wines from places other than California (see comments on Daily Grape episode 26). While I enjoy reading Steve's blog, every once in awhile I find his holier-than-thou attitude a little frustrating. While he did offer to review Colorado wines if I sent him a case, he would only do so on his blog, but not in the more widely distributed Wine Enthusiast Magazine. If you make great Colorado wine and want Steve to try it, let me know. If you are a Steve Heimoff fan (or critic) and would like him to explore non-California wines, let him know. Like all wines regions, Colorado offers a spectrum of wine styles and qualities, and together we can continue to show the world that some of Colorado's wines are truly world class.