Sommerliering seems like bulls**t

I think you have a point. I admired the dedication of these guys and I think that some of them are talented and knowledgeable. But I agree that restaurants are trying to up their status by paying money to a guy who has won prestige by being put through a wringer that very few can withstand.

It's far more *beep* than you can possibly imagine. They hardly ever get things right.

First, the sum total of their knowledge is nothing but a compendium of citations from back-labels and commercial glossies such as the Wine Spectator. No where in their curriculum is there any effort to instruct how wine-things really work.

That, of course, would involve a grasp of rudimentary science that's far over the heads of most--at least for the ones that I've met and with whom I've discussed. A persistent howler in this respect is their consistent misunderstanding of 'oxidation'--when the real culprit is bacterial spoilage.

Another good example would be their collective obedience and worship of 'terroir' which, as a testable null-hypotheses, simply doesn't exist. Yet all of their slavish rote memorization is intended to demonstrate 'unique' qualities of a particular area.

Then, of course, you encounter the blundering explanations for 'tannin' and 'malolactic ferment': the real importance of flavin-3-ols are described by its molecular structure, and no, lactic acid doesn't taste 'creamy'!

Moreover, knowing 'proper' service (by whose standards?)and doing real service are only nominally related; nothing in the masters program can prepare you for this because, after all, real service is defined by the customer.

Then, of course, there's purchasing and inventory/cost control. In this respect, the bottom line for the wine manager is to make money for his/her employer.

Now i could go on and on, including a recursive statement about the uselessness of double-blind tastings. What's necessary is the ability to malke a split-second decision in front of a customer as to whether the wine is acceptable in trams of being without fault. The rest is dross.

Bill Harris

It's far more *beep* than you can possibly imagine. They hardly ever get things right.

First, the sum total of their knowledge is nothing but a compendium of citations from back-labels and commercial glossies such as the Wine Spectator. No where in their curriculum is there any effort to instruct how wine-things really work.

That, of course, would involve a grasp of rudimentary science that's far over the heads of most--at least for the ones that I've met and with whom I've discussed. A persistent howler in this respect is their consistent misunderstanding of 'oxidation'--when the real culprit is bacterial spoilage.

Another good example would be their collective obedience and worship of 'terroir' which, as a testable null-hypotheses, simply doesn't exist. Yet all of their slavish rote memorization is intended to demonstrate 'unique' qualities of a particular area.

Then, of course, you encounter the blundering explanations for 'tannin' and 'malolactic ferment': the real importance of flavin-3-ols are described by its molecular structure, and no, lactic acid doesn't taste 'creamy'!

Moreover, knowing 'proper' service (by whose standards?)and doing real service are only nominally related; nothing in the masters program can prepare you for this because, after all, real service is defined by the customer.

Then, of course, there's purchasing and inventory/cost control. In this respect, the bottom line for the wine manager is to make money for his/her employer.

Now i could go on and on, including a recursive statement about the uselessness of double-blind tastings. What's necessary is the ability to malke a split-second decision in front of a customer as to whether the wine is acceptable in trams of being without fault. The rest is dross.

Bill Harris