Timothy Gaiser

Advice to Students for the CMS Certified Exam

2014-01-30T21:16:00Z

The Certified Sommelier Examination was introduced in December of 2005. Previously students who passed the MS Introductory examination could apply directly to the Advanced Course after waiting the required years’ time. More often than not first time students did poorly on the Advanced Exam for any number of reasons. Each student is unique so the three parts of the examination will always pose different challenges to different individuals. Historically the major challenge was the service exam where the combination of lack of appropriate preparation for dealing with nerves—sometimes extreme—in an audition situation doomed most first timers. Exceptions to the rule usually came in the form of students who were working the floor of upscale restaurants where they performed service to MS standards night in and night out, and who were also used to the pressure of being “on stage” in a top level venue.

Several years prior to 2005 we (the CMSA Board) had discussed the possibility of an intermediate level between the Introductory and Advanced Courses; a level that would accomplish several goals: first, to provide the hospitality industry with a much-needed basic sommelier certification; second, to introduce students to the three-part MS examination format; third, to give us a first look at their individual service skills.

Between 2004 and 2005 a team of Masters from the CMSA created the Certified Sommelier Examination with the help of UK and European Masters. After beta-testing, the exam went live at the end of 2005. While the content has changed from year to year the format of the exam has remained basically the same:

Theory: a 40-question written test combining multiple choice, short answer and matching questions.
Tasting: a blind tasting of two wines, one white and one red, with the student filling out a grid based on the MS Deductive Tasting Method.
Service: sparkling wine service with students being asked questions about various beverages that might be served during the course of a meal as well as questions about food and wine pairing.

Since that first exam in 2005 the Certified Sommelier Examination has, to a great extent, accomplished its goals. With that I’d like to offer some advice to students who are preparing to take the Certified Exam, especially those taking it for the first time.

Disclaimer! The following is my personal advice to students and in no way a reflection of the policies of the CMSA or its Board of Directors.

Theory Examination

The CMSA philosophy of theory curriculum has a lot to do with what a sommelier theoretically could be asked tableside by a guest about any beverage served in the restaurant. Emphasis is placed on wine but beer, spirits, sake, and aperitifs are important as well. Therefore, it’s important to realize that geography is vital to a sommelier’s body of knowledge; knowing where a wine is produced down to a single vineyard (if necessary) is paramount to success in the MS program.

Example: if a guest is asking about a vintage of Savennières “Clos de la Coulée de Serrant” from the producer Nicholas Joly, the sommelier/student should know the following about the wine:

It’s a dry white wine.
It’s made from the Chenin Blanc grape.
The Coulée de Serrant vineyard is located in the Anjou region of France’s Loire Valley, specifically in the AOP of Savennières.
The Coulée de Serrant vineyard is actually an AOP itself.

Further, if the guest asks about the biodynamic symbol on the bottle, the sommelier/student should be able to explain what it means and also provide some information about the philosophy of biodynamics, how it can affect wine quality, and some growers/producers that farm biodynamically in other regions of the world—all without burying the guest in a mountain of useless and confusing verbiage.

Once again, it’s important to note that MS theory exams focus on geography and being able to connect grape varieties to styles of wines made in specific geographical locations. From there students also need to study country and regional laws, classifications, terms about grape growing and winemaking, and major producers for important wines such at prestige cuvée Champagne.

Tasting Examination

The Certified tasting examination consists of tasting a white and a red wine and filling out a written grid based on the Deductive Tasting Method which is first taught in the Introductory Sommelier Class. The grid requires the student to input information concerning a wine’s aromas and flavors, the presence of minerality and/or earthiness, and the use of oak. Further, the grid asks that students assess the structural components of the wines; the levels of residual sugar, acidity, alcohol, the finish, and tannin in the red wine. Finally, the student is asked to deduce the best possible conclusion about the wine, which includes the climate in which the grapes were grown, Old World vs. New World style, the actual grape variety or blend of grapes, the country of origin, and the vintage of production.

It goes without saying that a good deal of practice is needed to become proficient at using the grid, not to mention tasting in general. The good news is that the grid can be downloaded for practice from the CMSA website at any time (here). The grape varieties used in the exam for both white and red wines are listed on the grid so the student can focus his or her tasting practice. Otherwise, here is further advice in preparing for the Certified tasting exam:

Descriptors: Be as thorough as you can in examining the wine for families/kinds of fruit and any non-fruit descriptors. Often students will hone in on one or two flavor descriptors and leave important pieces of information about the wine out—information that would help identify the wine(s). It’s important to work on expanding descriptors for fruit and non-fruit. If anything, use the written grid as a checklist and look for all the kinds of fruit and non-fruit listed in the wine.
Match descriptors to checked boxes. Remember that written descriptors for fruit and non-fruit should match the boxes filled in for the same. This rule applies to writing descriptors for minerality and earthiness—the descriptors should match the boxes you’ve filled in.
Oak: Remember to fill descriptors of oak influence such as vanilla, baking spices, etc. Don’t write the word “oak.”
Structural components: be as precise as you can in calibrating the amount of acidity, alcohol and tannin. This is best practiced by using extremes in the form of lemon juice vs. water for high acidity vs. no acidity and Port vs. Moscato d'Asti for high alcohol vs. low alcohol.
Oak vs. no oak: this is one of the crucial aspects of basic tasting--being able to assess the presence of oak aging in a wine or lack thereof. Once again I have to recommend calibrating oak usage with the use of extreme examples. This is because the brain learns from extreme opposites very quickly as in the difference between the colors black and white and being able to easily find gray in the middle. With respect to oak, tasting a heavily oaked California Chardonnay vs. a non-oaked Chablis or Mâcon will easily demonstrate the two extremes. The difference will be obvious and automatically recognized after a few repetitions.
Earthiness vs. no earth: Use the same technique above—calibrating with extremes. One can also use the same wines listed above (California Chardonnay vs. Chablis) or another pair of extremes in the form of Chinon vs. a Napa Merlot or Chianti Classico vs. a Barossa Shiraz.
Old World vs. New World style: This is a deduction based on the presence of earthiness along with information about the levels of alcohol and acidity in the wine and the use of new oak.
Climate: Assessing the possible climate of a wine can be done by reviewing the levels of alcohol and acidity. The general rule is that wines from grapes grown in warmer climates have higher alcohol and relatively lower acidity vs. wines from cooler climates which usually display lower levels of alcohol and higher levels of acidity.
Varietal Recognition: This arguably is the most challenging part of the Deductive Tasting Method and the MS tasting exams as well. It requires the student to practice with the tasting method over an extended period of time. It also requires the student to assemble and memorize a list of “markers” or common attributes that can be found in specific grape varieties and wines. Good sources for grape variety markers can be found on this website as well as on my blog.

A word about practicing tasting: make sure you are working in a tasting group as the dynamics of a good study group are essential to learning and improvement, not to mention the camaraderie and shared experience.

Finally, I’ve written about tasting and preparing for the MS tasting exams extensively on my blog. I’ve found that smelling and tasting wine is completely based on one’s memory; not only the memory of the various aromatics and flavors in wine but the combination of these components that make up the complete profile of a grape or style of wine. If memory is the key, then students can—and absolutely should—work with their own personal memories of these components and varietal profiles apart from actually tasting wine. I strongly believe that practicing memory of the components and profiles of grapes and wines is just as important and beneficial as actually tasting them.

Service Examination

The MS title is about being a world-class sommelier and thus service and working the floor are the essence of what we do. The service component is also important to an employer in terms of wanting to know if a potential hire knows the basics of correct service and can open a bottle of sparkling wine without inflicting bodily injury to themselves or those in the immediate vicinity. Safety is key in sparkling wine service. There are any number of ways to open a bottle of bubbly incorrectly—even dangerously—but only one way to do it right. Here are some vital pointers to do just that:

Mise-en-place—setting up:

Fold two—and ONLY two—serviettes for service. One will be used for opening the bottle and the other will be left on the bucket tableside if a bucket is used for service. In other words, don’t fold all the napkins on the service station.
Make sure the glassware is clean and polished.
Always line the tray with an unfolded cloth napkin; no fancy origami folds as they result in an uneven surface almost guaranteeing you’ll lose glassware in a spectacular fashion.
Place the glassware consistently at each cover; at the point of the knife is the most straight forward method.
Place glassware starting with the host or the person to the host’s left. Placing glassware is NOT gender specific so one trip around the table will suffice.
Place two under-liners or coasters to the right of the host, one for the cork and the other for the bottle, if the host decides to keep the bottle on the table.

Opening the bottle:

Never take the top of your hand off the bottle when opening. This is utterly crucial to opening the bottle safely and properly. BEFORE loosening the cage, place a folded serviette over the top of the bottle. Then with a firm grip over the serviette and top of the bottle loosen the wire cage and slowly remove the cage and cork at the same time by twisting the bottom of the bottle back and forth. Remember: the cage is NEVER removed before the cork.
Watch where you’re pointing the bottle when opening. Don’t point the bottle at the table or anyone else in the vicinity. Doing so is dangerous and cause for major deductions on your score.
Always place a serviette over the top of the bottle when opening. As mentioned above, use a serviette over the top of the bottle when opening to prevent spilling any wine if the cork exits the bottles suddenly and tragically.
Open the bottle as quietly as possible. A no-brainer. This is proper wine service and not the end of a Formula One race. Opening bottles of sparkling wine quietly is a matter of practice and repetition.
Remember to wipe the bottle with your serviette after you’ve removed the cork before pouring a taste for the host.
Remember to present the cork to the host on an underliner which is placed to the host’s right.

Serving the bottle:

Hold the bottle with a still wine grip. Do NOT hold the bottle with your thumb in the punt of the bottle when pouring; this method does not provide enough control and stability and the odds of dropping or losing control of the bottle increase significantly.
After presenting the cork pour a 1-to-1.5 ounce taste for the host. Wait for them to approve the wine and then serve the table in the following order: serve lady guests first and then men. Serve the host last regardless of gender.
Fill the glasses at least ½ to ¾ glass full with a maximum pour of an inch below the top of the glass.
Fill the glasses one at a time with a maximum of two pours for each glass; partial pouring and/or going around the table multiple times is not allowed.
Make sure the pours are even!
Gage the pour level/amount based on glass size and number of glasses to be poured so you don’t run out of wine.
It’s not necessary to empty the entire bottle of wine; in fact, there should be a little wine left in the bottle.

General Service points

Remember to serve from the right and to move around the table clockwise—ALWAYS—even if just returning to the service station.
Don’t reach across a guest’s space to place or clear glassware or serve wine--even if the chair is empty.
PRACTICE CARRYING A TRAY. This is the one part of service that cannot be faked. If you don’t regularly work with a tray lots of practice will be needed for an exam setting. Odds are you will be nervous. Practice!
You should be able to carry a tray comfortably with either hand. However, proper service dictates that the tray should be carried in the left hand and glassware placed with the right hand.

Service exam theory:

Work on major cocktails, aperitifs and after dinner spirits. Lists of all of the above are on this site. Study cocktails and aperitifs by category, i.e., vodka cocktails, gin cocktails etc.
Food and wine pairing: Have specific wine recommendations with producer and vintage in mind.
Be able to take a specific style—be it a high acid red wine or a white with residual sugar—to multiple places in the wine world.
Above all, know why the pairing works! Be able to explain why a wine works well with a specific dish in terms of the structural components of the wine (i.e., high acidity, lack or oak or smooth tannins). It’s the entire point of selling a specific wine with a certain dish.

General Service Advice:

Taking care of the table is paramount. Even though you’re in an exam setting remember that you are a sommelier and your job is to take care of the table—NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS. In a real life service situation you do not have the luxury of freaking out or giving up on a table or “failing.” Your job again is to take care of the guest and give them great service. The exam should be no different. Take care of the examiner(s) as you would any guest in your restaurant. To do so will translate into success.

Sight Unseen

2012-08-15T14:23:00Z

Part I: Using Visual Constructs to Calibrate the Structure of Wine

In Master Sommelier classes and tasting examinations we ask students to assess the structural components of wine, specifically the levels of residual sugar, alcohol, acidity and tannin as well as the length and quality of the finish. Further, we ask them to use a scale which ranges from low on one end to high on the other with increments in between. The scale looks something like this:

Low / medium- / medium / medium+ / high

There’s a catch: we ask students to give us one specific answer and not a range. Otherwise any wine could be described as medium-to-medium-plus across the board or almost close enough to be sort of nearly in the ball park. Not much point there. So the pressure of trying to be as accurate as possible with structure for a student can be immense. How do you really know how much acid is in the wine? How much alcohol? Tannin? Imagine sitting there with some wine in your mouth and trying to figure out how much saliva your saliva glands are producing in reaction to the wine at the moment. A little? A lot? A veritable cascade? Or just medium? (Whatever that feels like.) And can you feel the acidity on your front teeth and gums? Or is that something else? Or why is it you’re talking to yourself and hopefully it’s only one voice at a time or otherwise there could be arguments and then there could really be trouble.

Trying to figure out the structure of a wine as described above can only be called a “Beavis and Butthead” moment as in when those two delightfully dimwitted scamps are facing each other and chuckling vacantly for long periods of time. Mind you, this is not to be confused with Beavis consuming anything containing caffeine which makes him immediately go berserk and gibber wildly about being “cornholio” and so forth.

The answer to the structural assessment conundrum might be easier than we think. Recently I gave a presentation for the Society of Wine Educator’s annual conference on the first phase of a modeling project on tasting I’ve been working on for more than a year. The project allowed me the unique opportunity to work with some of the country’s top tasters in order to discover their internal strategies--literally how they do what they do when tasting wine. Ultimately the goal of my project is to replicate their strategies and hopefully be able to teach them to students.

The project included Brian Cronin MS; Doug Frost MS MW; Evan Goldstein MS; Tracy Kamens Ed.D., DWS, CWE; Karen MacNeil; Peter Marks MW; and Emily Wines MS. Needless to say, this is a pretty stellar group and all of them possess a remarkable ability to taste. In working with the group I used language patterns, eye movement patterns, and submodalities to deconstruct their tasting strategies and in doing so we made more than a few surprising discoveries. Perhaps the most surprising of all is how visual the entire internal tasting process is for us; how we create and use very unique and personal visual constructs for practically every aspect of tasting, from ascertaining the color and age of a wine to recognizing the aromas and flavors in the glass all the way to calibrating the structure of a wine as described above.

To that last point, without exception I found that the tasters I interviewed for the project commonly used internal visual structures or cues to calibrate the physical sensations of sweetness, acidity, alcohol, tannin and finish in wine. They literally use scales or other visual aids to calibrate—very precisely--the levels of all the structural elements in wine. Here are some examples:

Tracy Kamens Ed.D., DWS, CWE

To assess the amount of residual sugar in a wine Tracy sees scale directly in front of her which she describes as a continuum with markers from dry on the left to sweet on the right. To calibrate the wine for sweetness/dryness her attention moves on the scale until the right level is found and then a tick (mark) on the scale appears to marks the right point.

Doug Frost MS MW

All the scales for the various structural elements for Doug go from left to right, with “low” on the left and “high” on the right. Doug tastes a wine and then internally “points” to a place on the scale.   It’s also interesting to note that Doug’s scales interface with internal questions, dialogue and memories of previous wines as in a wine with high tannins which he remembers as astringent or painful.

Emily Wines MS

Emily had one of the most complex systems of structural calibrations of all. For acid she internally sees a bright yellow “school” ruler about 12” long with markers for low, medium, etc. As she tastes a wine she points to a mark on the ruler for the correct assessment. Calibrating alcohol is different. Here the ruler is blue in color and about 24 inches long with the same kind bubble found in a construction level.  As she's tasting to assess the alcohol level the bubble slowly moves to the appropriate mark for the correct answer.

For tannin Emily sees a piece of wool that’s stretched out in front of her at almost eye level, narrow at one end and much thicker at the other. To assess the amount of tannin she runs her “hand” from one end of the piece of wool to the other and then stops at the right point. But there’s a textural component as well: at the narrow end of the wool fabric is smooth while the thicker end is rough to the touch. So Emily’s scale not only gives her an assessment for tannin but also the texture of the wine as well. Finally, Emily calibrates the finish by seeing an internal image of the horizon and the farther she can see the longer the finish.

Tim Gaiser

In contrast to Emily my way of calibrating all the structural elements is about as straight forward as it gets. To make an assessment I internally see a slide ruler-like scale or device that’s about three to four feet long in front of me at chest level. The scale is graduated from low on the left to high on right with a red button in the middle on “medium”.   As I taste the wine the button moves until it matches the amount of acid or whatever element I’m calibrating.   Internally I point to the marker on the ruler and say “it’s medium-plus” to myself or whatever the answer is. If I’m not sure about the answer I literally bring the scale in closer and more marks appear between the levels making it easier to get the right level.

Creating and Using Your Own Scale

If wine professionals subconsciously use scales to assess structure in wine can it help you? I absolutely believe it can. In fact, over the last year I’ve taught hundreds of beginners to use a scale much like mine. In a very short period of time they’re able to get accurate information on a very consistent basis. Here’s how you can do the same.

Exercise: setting up your own personal scale

1. Stand up—it’s much easier to do any kind of visual work standing up and being fully present in your body.

2. See an internal scale in your mind’s eye in front of you. You can use a simple one like mine or you can design your own. Whatever you create just remember that it’s best to keep it simple in the beginning as you can always redecorate or upgrade in time.

3. Put markers on the scale for Low, Medium- , Medium, Medium+, and High.

4. Place a button or other kind of marker in the middle of the scale on medium.

5. Calibrate your scale: using your scale, practice marking off extreme “lows” and “highs” using beverages or foods that you’ve commonly experienced. Here’s an example using acidity:

High acidity: imagine biting into a slice of lemon and how that would taste and feel. Lemons have dramatically high acidity—as much or more than in most wines. As you’re experiencing tasting the lemon watch the button move from “medium” on your scale all the way to “high” on the far right.   Point to the right end of the scale and internally say, “that’s high acidity.”

Low acidity: imagine sipping water and noticing how little acidity is in water, if any. As you imagine sipping the water watch the button move from “medium” all the way to the left stopping at “low.” Point to the left end of the scale and internally say, “that’s low acidity.”

Now do the same for the other structural elements. Here are some suggestions:

a. Residual sugar: tasting a chalky substance for bone dry and something like Caro syrup for shockingly sweet.

b. Alcohol: water for low alcohol and Port or other fortified wine for high alcohol.

c. Tannin: tasting a sports drink for low tannin and chewing on a used tea bag for high tannin. Yikes.

d. Finish: tasting water again for a short finish (as in almost non-existent) and a fine whisky or brandy for a really long finish.

6. Try it with wine: now try using the internal scales with wine. Repetition will really help your assessment of the scale to become consistent in a short period of time.

7. Practice! Here are the keys:

a. Always start with the button or marker on medium.

b. Remember to follow the movement of the button/marker and internally point to where it stops.

c. Say the answer to yourself.

d. If you’re not sure about an answer bring the scale in closer to get a better look.

8. Experiment: odds are you’ll come up with a better scale and/or system than mine.

9. Have fun with this!

Tasting Exam Advice

2012-06-30T14:10:00Z

Many students and fellow Master Sommeliers (including me) consider the tasting exam to be by far the most challenging of the three segments of the overall examination. With that I’ve coached an untold number of students taking the tasting exams at both the Advanced and Master’s level over the years. Here’s a summary of advice and suggestions I’ve commonly given to those preparing for the exams. I hope you’ll find it useful.

Cheers!

Using the grid:

Consistency: the grid is your mantra and your security blanket. Use it the same way every time for every wine so it feels like a routine.

Be disciplined about how your use the grid: fellow Master and good friend Steven Poe has a saying about tasting drawn from his military career: think long, think wrong. I couldn’t agree more. Be concise with your assessment and description of a wine and stick to the grid. Mistakes are almost inevitable once stream of consciousness starts to creep into your thinking and description.

Bundle your descriptors in groups accordingly as several for fruit, non-fruit etc.

If you find yourself leaving out important parts of the grid or using it inconsistently it’s useful to practice talking through wines out loud (see below on associated rehearsal) so the grid becomes complete and automatic.

Sight:

Overall: get it out of the way in 20-30 seconds. Everything you need to say is literally right in front of you. Get through the clarity, brightness and color quickly but accurately.

Color: hone in on the difference between straw and yellow in white wines (think legal pad or taxi for the latter) and ruby red and garnet-reddish brown for reds. Yellow and garnet denote possible age in a wine. Note it these colors if are there and don’t be surprised to find some evolution in the glass as in the dried fruit and non-fruit qualities from either extended barrel age or bottle age. The appearance of a wine helps set up the rest and also helps you connect the dots.

Secondary colors: look for green and sliver in whites that denote youth and/or cool climate. With reds be sure to differentiate between the color of the core of the glass vs. the edge or rim. Give both colors and be aware that the color at the rim is practically always going to be lighter and more evolved than the color at the center of the glass. Rarely will you find the opposite.

Viscosity: this is one of the two or three times during the four minutes and ten seconds of tasting a wine that you should pause and wait for something to happen (tasting to assess sweetness/dryness and the structure are the others). When checking the viscosity swirl the glass, hold it and wait for at least 3-5 seconds. Allow time for the wine to set up on the sides of the glass and the tears/legs to begin to fall. If swirling the glass doesn’t seems to work rotate the glass slowly in your fingers for several seconds then slowly turn the glass upright. That should do the trick.

Nose:

General: because you’ve gotten through the appearance of the wine quickly you’ve allowed yourself a lot of time to smell the wine—and that’s a good thing as the nose of the wine is the main event, the most important aspect of tasting.

Initial impression: many times when first smelling a wine something leaps out of the glass and really gets your attention causing that little internal voice to say that “this wine is X!” If that happens by all means thank the internal voice, register the idea and then park it in your internal field. However, don’t immediately try to force the wine into the mold of whatever the initial impression is or you might suddenly find yourself in Albuquerque as in the completely wrong place. Jump to conclusions suffer contusions.

Fruit descriptors: expand your descriptors and make sure that you’re using all the fruit groups. For white wines look at apple/pear, citrus fruit, tropical fruit, and stone or pit fruit. For red wine the groups include red fruits, black fruits, blue fruits and dried fruits. While everyone’s impressions and memories of fruits can vary individually, be as specific as you can.

Advice: if you’re having trouble identifying a particular fruit aroma, try making it something totally different and unrelated as in a non-fruit or earth component. You’ll often get a very quick and accurate impression by simply contrasting an aroma with something it’s not.

Quality of fruits: be as accurate as you can with the quality of the fruits as in tart citrus vs. sweet citrus or fresh fruit vs. dried fruit vs. cooked fruit. Also be aware that fruit qualities for both white and red wines often change between the nose and palate. The ripe mango and other tropical fruits on the nose of a Pfalz Riesling often become tart and under ripe on the palate. The same goes for red wines: the ripe black fruits on the nose of a McLaren Vale Shiraz often turn to tart cranberry and red raspberry on the palate. Lots of variations are possible here so be aware the qualities of the fruit and if they change from nose to palate.

Non-fruit descriptors: to me non-fruit is one of the two most important elements in terms of being able to identify a given wine (structure is the other). As with the fruit descriptors, be sure to consider the entire list when smelling a wine. These include floral qualities, pepper spice and brown spice notes (the latter probably denoting oak), herbal and vegetal notes, botrytis on white wines (a combination of honey and stone fruits) and others. Also be aware that these qualities, like the fruit, can and will often change from nose to palate. If so, be sure to note.

Earth and mineral: it’s important to distinguish between inorganic and organic earth—literally the difference between rocks and dirt. Make the distinction and don’t be surprised to find both in the same wine. If so, note it and as with the fruit and non-fruit elements be sure to mention if the minerality/earthiness changes from the nose to the palate. It often does. Also, earthiness in wine is usually accompanied by other components such as damp leaves, forest floor, mushroom/truffle and more. If you find earth in a wine look beyond to these other related aromas and flavors—they’re probably there and important.

Wood: with wood the major goal is really just to see if it’s actually present in the wine and if so, whether the wood is used or new. Be sure to note any and all wood descriptors together as a group and also make sure to repeat any that are important on the palate.

Palate:

Overall: tasting involves two goals: confirming what you’ve already smelled in the glass and calibrating the structure as in the acid, alcohol and tannin as well as the finish.

Sweetness/dryness: for me the true measure of a wine’s sweetness or dryness is the finish. Taste the wine, wait a few seconds and then see what you have on the finish. It should be obvious.

Confirmation: go through the fruit, non-fruit, earth and oak components of the palate of the wine methodically. Quickly reassess and note the things you’ve smelled previously. If something is new by all means mention it. This is also the time to be aware if the qualities of the fruit, non-fruit or earth/mineral have changed from the nose to the palate.

Structure: while some individuals have no problem calibrating the structure of a wine quickly many others (including me) find that the structural elements including the acid, alcohol, and tannin, are a delayed physical response. As mentioned above, I strongly advise retasting the wine and waiting for at least 3-5 seconds before trying to describe it. Be as precise as you can as you can only provide one specific answer.

As a side note, most experienced tasters have an internal visual scale they use to confirm the precise level of acidity, alcohol, tannin and the finish; literally a visual device to help confirm what they’re tasting and sensing.

Conclusion:

First impression: this is the time to go back to that first impression if one popped up and see if it still makes sense. If not, chuck the idea or use it to compare or contrast possible grape varieties or appellations. However, if it still makes sense in the context of the wine be sure to at least mention it in your initial conclusion.

In terms of deducing a specific grape variety I find that more often than not it’s useful to go through a mental quick check list of what the wine is NOT, eliminating grapes and narrowing the possibilities of what it can be.

Avoid at all costs basing your conclusion on a single element that you’ve seen, smelled or tasted in the wine. One thing is rarely, if EVER, enough on which to base a conclusion. Use the entire grid to make your conclusion. Evan Goldstein MS calls it “CSI”-like work where you’re building a case throughout the tasting process as to what the wine could be. I couldn’t agree more.

Match non-fruit qualities to structural elements: most semi-aromatic white grapes and thin skinned red grapes have very similar fruit profiles but very different non-fruit qualities. Combine the non-fruit and the structure of the wine and you have a lot of information on which to base a conclusion.

Reset! Once you’ve finished a wine in a tasting or exam reset to the beginning of the process and start completely anew each time. If you have trouble with one of the wines in the flight get through it as completely and thoroughly as you can, make the best conclusion you can in the moment and then move on. Whatever happens, don’t allow one challenging wine to throw you off your game for the rest of the flight. Be disciplined, be focused, and be confident that you have done it many times before and can do it now in the moment.

Practicing tasting: associative memory and rehearsal

It goes without saying that any student must practice individually and also be part of a tasting group to be successful in the tasting exams. Both are invaluable and irreplaceable. However, after many years of coaching a lot of students I’ve come to believe that associative rehearsal, especially for those experienced students taking the Master’s Exam, can be just as useful as physically tasting wine. That’s simply because once a student gets beyond the Advanced Exam odds are they’ve tasted a great deal of wine and have a considerable, and sometimes remarkable, database of memories from previous wines.

For these students—and all students for that matter—the exam is all about memory, specifically olfactory and palate memory. Improving memory does not require having a glass of wine in hand. I strongly believe that someone at the Master’s Exam level needs to be able to mentally call up the complete experience of a classic wine—as in how it looks, smells, tastes and feels on the palate—almost on command.

With that I recommend students preparing for an exam regularly make time to mentally mock up a flight of six classic wines in an exam-type setting (again, all of this in terms of visualization) and then talk through the wines out loud using the MS grid just like they would during an examination. During this rehearsal the student needs to remember and experience each wine as completely and intensely as possible; seeing the wine clearly in their mind’s eye, smelling it completely and accurately, tasting it fully and noting the flavors and structural elements accurately, and then concluding the wine perfectly while feeling really confident.

Practicing tasting using associative rehearsal accomplishes several things simultaneously: it connects one to their previous memories of various specific components found in wine as well as their overall impressions and memories of classic wines as a package of sight, smell and taste; it also builds recognition in terms of describing a wine perfectly through auditory cognition and recognition. Finally, practicing talking through wines out loud helps to build an inner comfort zone for students in terms of having confidence using the language of the grid and speaking aloud in front of examiners.

I can’t recommend practicing with associative rehearsal strongly enough. So much of the tasting exam is about having confidence with one’s own internal experience, sensitivity, calibration and memory. This is a great way to improve it all.

Chianti Classico 2000 Project

2012-02-16T17:55:00Z

While in Tuscany last December I had dinner in Greve with Daniele Rosellini, chief enologist for the Chianti Classico Consorzio. More importantly, Daniele was a major part of the Chianti Classico 2000 project, a project that spanned 16 years and continues to alter the landscape for viticulture and winemaking in one of the world’s most well-known wine regions.

Rosellini began by saying that the clones of Sangiovese historically used in the Classico region were selected for quantity over quality. Add to that the fact that a majority of the vineyards in the region were planted in the 1960s or 1970s, and needed to be replanted at the time the project was proposed. Many producers, Rosellini told us, were unaware of the origin of the clones planted in their own vineyards, and those clones tended to ripen unevenly, resulting in harsh tannins in the wines that either necessitated blending with international varieties or extended barrique aging to soften.

The Chianti Classico 2000 Project was initially designed by the Consorzio in 1987 to modernize viticulture in the region and improve the quality of future wines. It was approved by Ministry of Agriculture and the Tuscan regional administration in 1988 and endorsed and financed by the EU. Further, the project involved cooperation between the agricultural schools at the University of Florence and the University of Pisa.

The entire project took 16 years to complete and was divided into three phases: on-site testing and inspections, data analysis, and the publication of the results. To facilitate the project, 16 experimental vineyards were planted over a total area of 25 hectares (61.75 acres). Five research cellars were then set up to vinify test batches of grapes from each vineyard. Ten small meteorological stations were also installed throughout the region to track micro- and macro-climate patterns. After the logistics were set the project members then agreed upon the following overall objectives:

To identify the best clones to cultivate
To identify the best methods of cultivation
To modernize and improve overall viticulture and wine production
To provide Chianti Classico producers with best methods and materials for production

From these objectives, six studies were created with the overall goals of modernizing grape growing and winemaking in the Chianti Classico region:

Grape Varieties: To measure the agronomic behavior in the vineyard and enological value of selected indigenous red grapes already used in Chianti Classico production. These grapes included Sangiovese, Canaiolo, Colorino and Malvasia Nera.
Rootstocks: To measure characteristics of selected rootstocks in use and considered best adapted to the soils and climate of Chianti Classico. Some rootstocks had never been used in the region before. This phase of the study also included experimentation on grafting techniques.
Planting Density: To measure the effect of planting density best suited to the region and to production levels ranging from 3,000 to 9,000 plants per hectare. Specifically, the following three criteria were tracked, with results showing that a density of 5000 plants per hectare displayed an optimum balance in terms of development and smaller yields.
1. Environment and yield
2. The vine's vegetative behavior
3. The influence on grape and wine quality
Vine Training: To measure the influence of foreign and traditional trellising systems on grape and wine quality with consideration given to reducing the high cost of manual pruning. Results showed that the Espalier system at 60 centimeters displayed the most promising results.
Soil Management: This study measured the effects of controlled grass-growing to limit soil erosion and to improve overall vineyard management. The results suggested that producers use grass as a cover crop on an on-going basis and avoid working soil on inclines if possible.
Clonal Selection: Clonal selection was arguably the heart and soul of the entire project. The study focused on the primary Chianti Classico varieties: Sangiovese, Canaiolo and Colorino. Initially 239 distinct clones were identified by the University of Pisa. Of these 234 clones, 34 were selected for the study experiment because they displayed high immunity to common viral diseases. These included 24 clones of Sangiovese, eight of Canaiolo and two Colorino clones. In 1995, the 34 selected clones were planted in specific vineyard sites throughout the region. These sites were chosen because they reflected typical regional variations. In 1998 fruit was harvested from each site and then vinified separately at one of the research cellars. From there a study tracked how the young wines evolved the year after the harvest. The results of the study identified eight new clones that are ideally suited to the Chianti Classico region, including seven clones of Sangiovese and one clone of Colorino. These new clones consistently displayed smaller berries, thicker skins, and more open bunches. They also showed the most consistency through varied climatic conditions. The new clones were then entered in the Italian national registry of vine varieties as “Chianti Classico 2000,” specifically CCL 2000 nos. 1 – 8. Four of the clones became commercially available in 2006. Since then over 300,000 vines have been sold to over 50 estates, including renowned properties such as Fontodi, Fonterutoli and Badia a Coltibuono.

The future impact of the clonal study will be played out over the next several decades. It is estimated that 60% of the Chianti Classico vineyards will be replanted to the new clones over next ten years if commercially viable. Keep in mind the fact that it costs approximately €35,000 to plant one hectare of new vines. Regardless, the new clones should make for easier cultivation as well as more consistent wines with softer, balanced tannins. Rosellini also believes there will be a trend towards less use of international varieties and a return to the traditional medium-sized barrels as opposed to the use of barriques.

In the end one can only conclude that the Chianti Classico 2000 Project was a remarkable undertaking and definitely one of the top studies of its kind ever completed. But the proof, as they say, is in the bottle. The day after our dinner with Rosellini we had an opportunity to taste 30 Chianti Classico Riservas at the Consorzio headquarters. Most of the wines were from the current 2008 vintage with some older bottlings as well. I have to say that the tasting was one of the delightful surprises of the entire trip. Across the board the wines showed consistent high quality with considerable depth, complexity and a wonderful balance of the fruit, acid, and tannin components. The experience also served to reaffirm my belief that Sangiovese is one of the most versatile red grapes of all and that the purest expression of the Sangiovese is Chianti Classico. Here are a few of my favorite wines from the tasting:

1. 2008 Banfi Riserva
Vibrant red fruits, sandalwood, and dried rose with dusty earth and a touch of wood. Elegant, refined and long finish.

2. 2008 Bibiano Riserva "Vigna del Capanninio"
More wood influence up front but with lots of savory notes, dried red berries and dusty-woodsy earth. Long, sappy and very good.

3. 2008 Capanelle Riserva
Deep red berry fruit with anise/herb, dried flowers and damp earth. Textbook Chianti palate.

4. 2008 Casale dell Sparviero Riserva
Pronounced floral notes with cranberry and craisin fruit, sandalwood; and mushroom consommé. Tart, vibrant and persistent.

5. 2008 Castello Vicchiomaggio Riserva Agostina Petri
Intense, vibrant red fruits with sandalwood, anise and bitter herb notes. Earth, truffle and wood notes on the palate.

6. 2008 Castello Vicchiomaggio Riserva "La Prima"=
Ripe red fruits with floral, sandalwood-spice and dusty earth. Riper, sweet fruit on the palate with a long finish framed by wood. Very good.

7. 2008 Fattoria Nittardi Riserva
Deep, concentrated cranberry/plum fruit with pronounced green herb and woodsy notes. Good depth and concentration on the palate with a persistent finish.

8. 2008 Felsina Riserva Rancia
Concentrated red fruits with dried floral, anise and Lapsang Soochong tea notes. Elegant, seamless and long on the palate. Excellent.

9. 2008 Fontodi Riserva Vigna al Sorbo
Deep, rich and intense fruit with tomato/herb and anise notes. Wonderful concentration and depth of fruit with a long, tart finish. Very complex. Outstanding.

10. 2008 Querceto di Castellina Riserva
Very ripe and concentrated with spicy sandalwood and dark earth notes. Impressive intensity and concentration; long and complex.

11. 2008 Rocca della Macie Riserva di Fizzano
Deep ripe and plummy with red floral, herb and chalk/earth notes. Juicy, plummy, delicious.

12. 2008 Terre di Melazzno Riserva Elikia
Very pure red berry fruit with savory notes and a touch vanilla spice.

Older Vintages

1. 1990 Castello di Verrazzano Riserva
Lots of rancio character: fruit cake character with prune, spice, black licorice and old wood. Elegant, well-aged and delicious.

2. 1993 Felsina Riserva Berardenga Rancia
Very complex and layered with a seamless palate.

3. 1998 Capanelle Riserva
Vinous, deep and rich with lots of dried fruits, spice and woodsy character. Still plenty of time.

February 16, 2012
Tim Gaiser

My Recent Trip to Prosecco

2012-01-19T09:21:00Z

Last month I had an opportunity to spend two days in the Conegliano-Valdobbiadene region of the Veneto and experience Prosecco Superiore DOCG first hand. It was everything I didn’t expect: a gorgeous, rural landscape dotted with small villages and with vineyards so steep it was if we were in the middle Mosel. What also quickly became apparent was the monumental gap between worlds of simple Prosecco DOC and Prosecco Superiore which was elevated to DOCG status in 2009. The scale of production makes that immediately apparent with the DOC zone comprised of over 31,000 acres and producing over 128 million bottles annually. By comparison, the DOCG is less than half the size at 14,600 acres centered in the area’s two major villages of Conegliano and Valdobbiadene as well as the other DOCG village of Colli Asolani. Annual production hovers around 65 million bottles coming from the areas 3,000 vine growers and 166 bottling companies.

Vineyards in Conegliano

To understand Prosecco Superiore it’s helpful to have a timeline:

The area was known to the Romans as Pucino
1772: 1st written reference of Prosecco
1876: the school of oenology founded
1923: the institute for viticultural research founded
1962: the Prosecco Consorzio is founded
1966: the Prosecco wine route (much like Napa’s Highway 29) is opened
1969: DOC granted for Prosecco
2003: a separate Conegliano-Valdobbiadene sparkling wine district is designated
2009: DOCG status granted to Prosecco Superiore Coneglio-Valdobiaddene

Production for Prosecco Superiore is 90% frizzante and 10% still wine, which is locally called tranquillo. We did have a chance to taste the latter and I found it to be a gentle aromatic white.

Grapes

Prosecco Superiore is produced from a minimum of 85% Glera with a maximum of 15% other local grapes that include Verdiso, Perera, Bianchetta, and Glera Lunga. A maximum of 15% of Chardonnay and Pinot Noir can also be legally used but only for the frizzante wines.

Glera: a vigorous variety and yields must be kept low.

Verdiso: first documented in the 15^th century; it adds high natural acidity and aromatic complexity

Bianchetta: first documented in the 16th century; it adds body and richness to wines in less ripe vintages

Glera Lunga: gives firmness and structure

Topography

What was the most surprising impression (shocking, to be precise) of Conegliano- Valdobbiadene region was the topography which is completely different from the endless sea of flatland vineyards that make up the DOC region. The vineyard aspect is somewhere between the middle Mosel and the Douro Valley. In many places, most notably the Cartizze, the region’s gem, the aspect of the vines are easily beyond a black diamond ski slope. One immediately makes the connection to the necessity of endless hours of hand labor and a new sense of value in the wines.

Climate

Generally the Prosecco Superiore region has a mild climate with an average mean temperature of 54 degrees F. and the average rainfall at 49 inches. Conegliano tends to be warmer and drier making for richer wines. Valdobbiadene has wider diurnals with the wines displaying racier acidity.

Soils

Soil types for the Conegliano area are primarily comprised of clay and limestone with a mix of alluvial and glacial. The soils of Valdobbiadene consist of moraines, sandstone and clay.

The Prosecco Hierarchy of Quality

Prosecco DOC

The base appellation for Prosecco wine made in the region of Treviso.

Prosecco Superiore DOCG

The “classico” region comprised of the three villages of Conegliano, Valdobbiadene and Asolo. The latter produces a much smaller quantity of wine than the other two.

Prosecco Superiore Rive DOCG

Prosecco Rive can only be applied to sparkling wines. The term “Rive” in local dialect translates as “vineyards planted on steep land” and applies to wines made from one of 43 specific single vineyards in the Coneglio-Valdobiaddene district. Wines designated as Rive must list the name of the village as well as the vintage on the label.

Prosecco Superiore di Cartizze DOCG

The subzone of Cartizze is considered the “grand cru” of Prosecco. It was officially recognized in 1969 when the DOC zone was established. Cartizze is comprised of 106 hectares (164 acres) of remarkably steep vineyards in the Valdobbiadene communes of San Pietro di Barbozza, Santo Stefano, and Saccol. This small area is a perfect combination of mild climate, aspect and soils. It’s also among the most expensive vineyard real estate on the planet with a single hectare valued at over one million Euros.

Vineyards in Cartizze

Harvest

The harvest takes place in mid-September to early October and practically all the vineyards are hand harvested as the steep terrain simply doesn’t allow for machine harvesting. Generally, the vineyards of Conegliano are harvested first with those in Valdobbiadene typically later. Yields for the entire region are set at a maximum of 13.5 tonnes per hectare.

Winemaking

By law a maximum of 70 liters of must can be extracted from 100 K grapes. After pressing the must is allowed to settle and clarify at 41-50 degrees F. Primary fermentation takes place in stainless steel over the course of 15-20 days at temperatures between 64-68 degrees F. After primary fermentation the base wines are blended into cuvée. The secondary fermentation takes place over 25-60 days with temperatures ranging between 59 and 64 degrees F. At end the temperature is taken down to 32 degrees F. to leave some residual sugar in the wine. Before bottling the new wines undergo a tasting exam by a Consorzio panel. The new wine can legally be released for sale 30-40 days after bottling and the addition of the DOCG seal, which lists an individual number for each bottle that can be tracked back to the winery.

Styles of Prosecco Superiore

Prosecco Superiore is made in three different styles designated by residual sugar content: Brut, Extra Dry and Dry. Residual sweetness ranges from up to 12 grams per liter for Brut, 12-17 grams for Extra Dry and more than 17 grams for Dry. I found the dryness/sweetness levels of Brut and Extra Dry similar to that of Champagnes labeled the same. Dry Prosecco Superiore reminds me of Moscato di Asti in style.

The Wines

Giancarlo Vettorello, director of the Consorzio, told us the wines from Conegliano tend to have more structure while wines from Valdobbiadene have more perfumed aromatics. Generally I found that to be true but regardless found the overall quality to be outstanding and the wines fresh, vibrant and delicious. Here are some of my favorites:

1. NV Conte Collalto Brut: quite dry for Prosecco with very good structure and length

2. 2010 Zardetto Brut Tre Venti Rive di Ogliano: very floral and pretty on the nose with a lot of intensity and minerality on the palate. Very good.

3. NV Cantine Maschio Brut, Rive di Colbertaldo: fresh, grapey, and even tropical nose. Brut style with a delicious balance of fruit and acid, and the right touch of residual sweetness.

4. 2010 Sorelle Bronca Brut Particella 68: aromatic floral nose with notes of Asian pear, Kiwi and almond. Wonderful structure and length on the plate.

5. 2010 Astoria Extra Dry: tart apple and Asian pear with white flowers and a touch spice. Juicy and vibrant on the palate.

6. NV Furlan Extra Dry; very floral with spice and almond notes. A delicious touch of residual on the palate; like bottled springtime.

7. NV La Farra Extra Dry: green fruits, fennel bulb and anise. Delicious balance between fruit, acid and residual sweetness.

8. NV Spagnol Extra Dry: floral and fennel/smoke notes on the nose with pronounced mineral on the palate.

9. NV Consorzio Cartizze Dry: the most concentrated wine of the flight. Orange citrus, ginger spice and lots of white flowers.