Pinot Noir Summit 2009 Enabling Siryel

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Pinot Noir Summit 2009 Enabling Siryel"

Peregrine Morton
6 years ago
Views:

1 Pinot Noir Summit 2009 Enabling Siryel April 5th 2009 Cyril Derreumaux

2 Summary The context of the tasting The aim The tasters The wines The evaluation grid Are there distinct groups in the 44 Pinot tasted? Statement Graphs allowing answering Interpretations Conclusions General classification of the wines Statement Graphs allowing answering Interpretations Conclusions Influence of the regional parameter on the classification Statement Graphs allowing answering Interpretations Conclusions Influence of the year parameter on the classification Statement Graphs allowing answering Interpretations Conclusions Influence of the kind of taster on the classification Statement Graphs allowing answering Interpretations Conclusions

3 The context The aim / objectives Using Siryel to get a more relevant and wider vision of the classification of the 44 best Pinot Noir already selected. The tasters Gaffney Rusty Magel Nikitas Terry Maria Landis Ellen Darwin Susan Papaliolios Andreus Buckley Mark Ball Jim Lawton Cheryl Lawton Bruce Mroz Lisa Derreumaux Cyril

4 The wines All the wines come from a selection of the best Pinot Noir, done over 250 wines a few days before. Identification Denomination Year Variety aqua marine Ridgeway 2005 Pinot Noir beige Laetitia 2006 Pinot Noir black Sonoma Coast Vineyards 2005 Pinot Noir blue Vision Cellars 2007 Pinot Noir blue green Adobe Road Winery 2006 Pinot Noir brick Fess Parker 2006 Pinot Noir bronze Per Bacco Cellars 2006 Pinot Noir brown Willowbrook Cellars 2006 Pinot Noir burgundy PARITUA 2007 Pinot Noir chartreuse Bargetto 2006 Pinot Noir coral Heart O The Mountain 2006 Pinot Noir dark blue Halleck Vineyard 2005 Pinot Noir dark gray David Bruce Winery 2006 Pinot Noir dark green Cuvaison Estate 2007 Pinot Noir dark red RN ESTATE 2007 Pinot Noir deep purple Londer Vineyards Paraboll 2006 Pinot Noir gold Shandel s Oppenlander Vyrd 2006 Pinot Noir gray Sebastiani Vineyards & Winery 2007 Pinot Noir gray blue Spy Valley 2007 Pinot Noir green Phillips Hill 2007 Pinot Noir gunmetal Stag Hollow 2005 Pinot Noir hot pink Jargon 2007 Pinot Noir khaki Segue Cellars 2007 Pinot Noir lilac FORT ROSS VINEYARD 2005 Pinot Noir lt blue TR Elliott 2006 Pinot Noir lt green Sand Hill Wines 2006 Pinot Noir lt pink Lions Pride 2005 Pinot Noir lt yellow Stephen's 2006 Pinot Noir magenta Seawind 2007 Pinot Noir mint green Orentano 2005 Pinot Noir

5 Identification Denomination Year Variety orange Mayro-Murdick 2006 Pinot Noir orchid Lucienne 2006 Pinot Noir peach Kenwood Vineyards 2006 Pinot Noir dusty rose Nth Degree 2006 Pinot Noir periwinkle Claiborne & Churchill 2006 Pinot Noir pink Ampelos Cellars 2005 Pinot Noir pumpkin Brutocao Cellars, Estate Bottled 2006 Pinot Noir purple David Bruce Winery 2005 Pinot Noir red Left Edge 2007 Pinot Noir tan Schug Pinot Noir Carneros 2007 Pinot Noir turquoise Bohemian Vineyard 2007 Pinot Noir wedgewood Brancott Terraces 2007 Pinot Noir white Artesa Winery 2007 Pinot Noir yellow Olson Ogden 2006 Pinot Noir

6 The evaluation grid The evaluation grid is composed of 21 criteria, chosen by Barbara Drady to be relevant and easy to use during the tasting. Sight Clear / Cloudy Pinot Like Nose Preference Pinot Like Cherry Strawberry Smoky Mushrooms/Earthy Spices Lavender Rose Petals Oaky Mouth Preference Pinot Like Integration Balance Acidity General appreciation Love it Would buy Price range Would Recommend this

7 Are there some groups in the 44 pinot tasted? Statement These Pinots are the 44 best selected in 250 ones. Do we have any regroupment possible? If yes how are they distributed? Graphs & interpretations B C D A We can clearly identify 4 different groups. B & C are close A & D are close A contains much more wines than the others (47% of the total) The groups are set, let s detail their composition, in the following grids.

8 Group A: aqua marine beige black blue green burgundy chartreuse dark green gold gray blue green hot pink khaki lt pink magenta mint green orange orchid peach tan turquoise yellow Ridgeway Laetitia Sonoma Coast Vineyards Adobe Road Winery Paritua Bargetto Cuvaison Estate Shandel's Oppenlander Vineyard Spy Valley Phillips Hill Jargon Segue Cellars Lions Pride Seawind Orentano Mayro-Murdick Lucienne Kenwood Vineyards Schug Pinot Noir Carneros Bohemian Vineyard Olson Ogden Group B: blue bronze deep purple gunmetal lilac pink pumpkin white Vision Cellars Per Bacco Cellars Londer Vineyards Paraboll Stag Hollow Fort Ross Vineyard Ampelos Cellars Brutocao Cellars, Estate Bottled Artesa Winery

9 Group C: brick brown lt blue lt green lt yellow dusty rose purple red Fess Parker Willowbrook Cellars TR Elliott Sand Hill Wines Stephen's Nth Degree David Bruce Winery Left Edge Group D: coral dark blue dark gray dark red gray periwinkle wedgewood Heart O The Mountain Halleck Vineyard David Bruce Winery RN Estate Sebastiani Vineyards & Winery Claiborne & Churchill Brancott Terraces

10 We now know that we have 4 different groups, but what is the sensory profile of each? How could they be defined? To close the identification of the groups, here is the comparison between the profiles: Group C Group B Group A Group D Thanks to such a graph we can easily classify the groups according to their appreciation: From D to C the preference goes down. Being the more pinot like, the more balanced and one of the less smoky, Group D is preferred. Now that the groups are identified, how are they represented on a general vision of all the wines tasted? Do we have a clear identification of the groups? How could we sum up their differences?

11 Here is a graph helpful for all these questions: Group C Group A Group D Group B The position of the groups on the map is concordant with the profile graph of the previous page: Going right the wines are preferred Going left they are not Going down they are more pinot like Going up they are more smoky and oaky We can say that: people prefer wines that are less smoky, oaky and more pinot like. Conclusions The wines tasted by consumers and professionals were classified into 4 sensory relevant groups: Group A Group B Group C Group D Oaky Smoky Balanced 2nd Less expressive Balanced Liked 3rd Mushroom / Earthy Less expressive Less liked 4th Pinot Like Rose petals Balanced Preferred group 1st 21 Wines 8 Wines 8 Wines 7 Wines

12 General classification of the wines Statement The general classification of the wines is based on the tasting of more than 200 people. Is there a difference between Siryel and the usual system? Let s compare both. Graphs & interpretations Men choices Panel #1 - Left Edge Winery 2007 Bodega Ridge Vineyard Pinot Noit, Sonoma Coast (Red) #2 - Heart O The Mountain 2006 Estate Pinot Noir, Santa Cruz Mountains (Coral) #3 - David Bruce 2005 Reserve Pinot Noir, Sonoma Coast (Purple) At Summit #1 - David Bruce 2005 Reserve Pinot Noir, Sonoma Coast (Purple) #2 - Claiborne & Churchill 2006 Twin Creeks Pinot Noir, Edna Valley (Periwinkle) #3 - Left Edge Winery 2007 Bodega Ridge Vineyard Pinot Noit, Sonoma Coast (Red) Siryel - Halleck, 2005 Halleck Vineyard Russian River Valley Dark (Blue) - Heart O The Mountain 2006 Estate Pinot Noir, Santa Cruz Mountains (Coral) - David Bruce 2005 Reserve Pinot Noir, Sonoma Coast (Purple) - Sebastiani Vineyard & Winery 2007, Sonoma County (Gray) - Jargon 2007, California (hot pink) - Seawind 2007, Sleepy Hollow Vineyard Santa Lucia Highland, (Magenta) The men choice is quite similar between the two sessions (panel & summit). Coherence we can also see thanks to the Siryel results that show 2 of the 3 preferred wines in the best group. Let s detail the classification done by the men, in how many groups would they classify the wines? What are the characteristics of the best group? What is the sensory profile of the wines from this best group?

13 Men choices with Siryel: 6 groups distinct can be created In this group, 6 wines are present: Group Green is perceived as the most qualitative Purple : David Bruce Winery Lavander: Sebastiani Red : Halleck Black : Heart O the Mountain Bleu: Jargon Green: Seawind

14 Women choices Panel #1 - Bohemian Vineyard 2007 Freestone Estate Pinot Noir, Russian River (Turquoise) #2 - Segue Cellars 2007 Filligreen Vineyard Pinot Noir, Anderson Valley (Khaki) #2 - Sonoma Coast Vineyards 2005 Freestone Hills Pinot Noir, Sonoma Coast #3 Claiborne & Churchill 2006 Twin Creeks Pinot Noir, Edna Valley (Periwinkle) Summit #1 - Left Edge Winery 2007 Bodega Ridge Vineyard Pinot Noit, Sonoma Coast (Red) #2 - Lucienne 2006 Lone Oak Pinot Noir, Santa Lucia Highlands #2 - David Bruce 2005 Reserve Pinot Noir, Sonoma Coast (Purple) #3 - Brutacao Cellars 2006 Estate Bottled Pinot Noir, Anderson Valley (Pumpkin) Siryel - Claiborne & Churchill 2006 Twin Creeks Pinot Noir, Edna Valley (Periwinkle)Yellow - Olson Ogden 2006 Russian River Valley - RN Estate 2007 Fiddlestix Vineyard Santa Rita Hills (Dark Red) - Philipps Hill 2007 Corby Vineyard Anderson Valley (Green) - Shandel s Oppenlander Vineyard 2006 Mendocino County (Gold) - Kenwood 2006 Russian River Valley (Peach) - Brancott Terraces 2007 Marlborough, New Zealand The women choice is not similar between the two sessions (panel & summit). Only of the 3 preferred wines is classified in the best group. Let s detail the classification done by the women; in how many groups would they classify the wines? What are the characteristics of the best group? What is the sensory profile of the wines from this best group?

15 Women choices with Siryel: 6 groups distinct can be created Group blue is perceived as the most qualitative In this group, 7 wines are present: Blue: Claiborne & Churchill Yellow: Olson Ogden Black : RN Estate Purple : Philipps Hill Red : Shandel Lavander: Kenwood Green: Brancott Terraces

16 Influence of the regional parameter on the classification Statement Are the groups we have observed before, formed by homogeneous geographical provenience? That is to say, could we identify a provenience that would be preferred by the tasters? Graphs & interpretations Central Coast x 10 Sonoma Coast x 8 Santa Cruz x 2 Russian River x 9 Sonoma Mendocino x 3 Anderson Valley x 4 New Zealand Oregon 3 Carneros x 4 Group B 4x 1x 1x 1x 1x Group C 2x 2x 1x 1x 1x 1x Group D 3x 1x 1x 1x 1x Group A 4x 4x 4x 3x 3x 1x 1x 1x As the proveniences are not represented in the same quantities, we have to be careful. But according to that graph we can see that Group D is composed of a majority of wines from Russian River. We also have wines from that region in the other groups. Conclusions There is no group composed by a high majority of wines from the same place. Each group has wines from every place. We can conclude that this aspect is not identified by the tasters.

17 Influence of the year parameter on the classification Statement Is the classification related to the year of production or mostly to the wines themselves? Graphs & interpretations 2005 x x x 15 Group B 2x 4x = 1/5 2x Group C 2x 3x = 1/6 3x = 1/5 Group D 2x 2x 3x = 1/5 Group A 3x = 1/3 11x = >50% 7x = 50% As the years are not represented in the same quantities, we have to be careful. Even if the groups are all composed of wines from each vintage, Group A has a majority of Conclusions As for the provenience of the wines, we can conclude that the vintage effect is less important than the one due to the producer, otherwise we would have had groups composed of a single vintage.

18 Influence of the kind of taster on the classification Statement Do the women and the men have done the same groups? Are the wines they prefer the same? How close are they to the general classification? If some differences exist, which are they? Graphs & interpretations Men - Halleck, 2005 Halleck Vineyard Russian River Valley Dark (Blue) - Heart O The Mountain 2006 Estate Pinot Noir, Santa Cruz Mountains (Coral) - David Bruce 2005 Reserve Pinot Noir, Sonoma Coast (Purple) - Sebastiani Vineyard & Winery 2007, Sonoma County (Gray) - Jargon 2007, California (hot pink) - Seawind 2007, Sleepy Hollow Vineyard Santa Lucia Highland, (Magenta) Women - Claiborne & Churchill 2006 Twin Creeks Pinot Noir, Edna Valley (Periwinkle) - Olson Ogden 2006 Russian River Valley (Yellow) - RN Estate 2007 Fiddlestix Vineyard Santa Rita Hills (Dark Red) - Philipps Hill 2007 Corby Vineyard Anderson Valley (Green) - Shandel s Oppenlander Vineyard 2006 Mendocino County (Gold) - Kenwood 2006 Russian River Valley (Peach) - Brancott Terraces 2007 Marlborough, New Zealand All - Heart O The Mountain (coral) - Halleck Vineyard (dark blue) - David Bruce Winery (dark gray) - RN Estate (dark red) - Sebastiani Vineyards & Winery (gray) - Claiborne & Churchill (periwinkle) - Brancott Terraces (wedgewood) Quantity in common: Women & Men 0 % Women & All 43 % Men & All 57 % The list and the graph from the previous page show us that the best wines for the women are different from the best wines for the men. There is no wine in common.

19 As there were some more men than women in the tasting with Siryel, it is normal to find that 57% of the preferred wines for all the tasters, come from the ones preferred by the men and only 43% come from the ones preferred by the women. So the groups are completely different, but on which criteria could we characterize this difference? Let s have a look to the profiles: Men All Women According to this graph we can say that the preferred wines of both women and men are close. Compared to the men, women prefer wines that are more: Spices Smoky Mushroom Oaky Both would recommend their preference but the women would be more likely to buy them.

20 Conclusions Women and men have different preference, the wines they rated with the highest scores are different, but this is due to a preference that is different: according to this tasting, that group of women prefers wines that are more intense, than what likes that group of men.

Sommelier s Selections

BOTTLED WHITES & REDS Sommelier s Selections 116 CHARDONNAY, ALBERT BICHOT 15 (CHABLIS, FRANCE) 54 259 CHENIN BLANC, A.A. BADENHORST 15 (WESTERN CAPE, SOUTH AFRICA) 45 261 PINOT BIANCO, TERLANO 15 (ALTO