Matt Skinner: Yes, I've recommended untasted wines
November 13, 2009
Stuart Peskett and Adam Lechmere
Jamie Oliver's head of wine Matt Skinner has admitted to not tasting several wines that he recommends in his latest book.
In The Juice 2010, published by Mitchell Beazley in the UK, Skinner lists New World wines from the 2009 vintage that were not bottled until months after the last deadline for the book.
Skinner, who is group wine manager for TV chef Jamie Oliver's Fifteen restaurant in Melbourne, was originally criticised by New Zealand wine writer Michael Cooper in The Listener magazine.
Cooper claimed that Skinner could not have recommended a New Zealand wine months ahead of publication, before Cooper himself had even tasted it.
In a statement sent to decanter.com Skinner said, 'It is imperative that I taste all the wines that I recommend.
'However there are some releases that are consistent from year to year, and as popular, good value and accessible wines I want to include them because I know that my readers will appreciate them.
'In order to do so I include non-specific tasting notes based on the current and previous year's vintage, focusing more on basic flavours and compatibility with food.'
There is no indication in the text that these notes are non-specific. The entry for the Vasse Felix Semillon Sauvignon Blanc from Margaret River, priced at £11.99, reads, '…the palate is fresh as a daisy and puncuated by the kind of lip-smacking acidity that makes this wine almost impossible to put down.'
The wines recommended from 2009 are Jacob's Creek Riesling 2009, Nepenthe Adelaide Hills Sauvignon Blanc, Vasse Felix Semillon Sauvignon Blanc from Margaret River, Brown Brothers Moscato, Unison Rosé, Hawkes Bay, New Zealand and Doña Dominga Old Vines Chardonnay from Colchagua, Chile.
Skinner's tasting notes are submitted every January, with a final revision date in May, before publication in October of the same year. Most of the wines in question are not bottled, or shown for tasting, until June or July.
Hilary Lumsden, Mitchell Beazley commissioning editor, said, 'For our first edition, in 2006, the feedback we got was that by the time people went out and bought the book, the wines were already off the shelves, so the book was effectively out of date.
'We either upset one side or the other. There's the side that wants the most up-to-date information, and there's Michael Cooper's side. The majority of the wines in The Juice don't rely on vintage variation. A lot of them are going to be consistent each vintage.'
However, in a recent GQ column, Skinner wrote: 'It's important to remember that every year is different and that no two years – even in the same spot – will ever be the same. That's the beauty of Mother Nature.'
Mitchell Beazley said in a statement, 'It is always our intention that the advice we give is accurate and reflective of the wines available.'
Mitchell Beazley is the UK's leading wine publisher, whose list of authors includes Hugh Johnson and Jancis Robinson (the World Atlas of Wine), Andrew Jefford (The New France), Stephen Brook, Michael Schuster and other major wine writers.
Have your say... To post your comment on this story, email us at news@decanter.com
I am always ready to recommend Latour without having tasted it!! Who are these so-called specialists?? Nils Stormby, Malmo, Sweden
I think this situation with Matt Skinner is ridiculous. Any sommelier, who comments or writes about wines which he or she has not previously tasted certainly puts his or her integrity into question. It's like a chef not tasting the food before it has been sent from the pass. Robert Giorgione
Some time back we had the problem with Parker, and any conflict of interests he might have.. and once again, we see that this is all a business. It is amazing how some houses manage to get through these critics on regular basis and manage on regular basis to get accreditations from them, whilst other wine producers creating some fantastic wines go on unnoticed.
This business of stars and points by self appointed experts has become big business for them and their families who inherit the magic taste and become also undisputed experts, pocketing hefty sums as they go along building their business at the expense of genuine and honest wine makers, who do not come within their sites or cannot afford the road that leads there..
Consumers should be intelligent enough to rely on their own personal palate and try different wines.
We here in Malta produce some extraordinary wines marked by our particular terrior and climate, but are too small for any big boy to notice us..except for the original Master of wines Hugh Johnson, who has shown some interest here.. Victor Bonello - Montekristo Estates
No vintage variation in Margaret River? This seems like a strange statement coming from such a respected wine publisher as Mitchell Beazley. Not sure if Hugh Johnson, Jancis and the other excellent wine writers mentioned would be so happy with this statement.
As for always recomending Latour, is there no vintage variation in Bordeaux either? Jack Chaddock, Handford Wines
Well, shame on skinner, but I'm equally concerned with what seems like a frivolous response to a stain on a distinguished publishing house.
Editor Lumsden's remarks suggest that she excuses Skinner because, with the wines off the shelves by the time his book got on the shelves, no one was misled. The ethical ice is damned thin here, and she may be factually incorrect, as well, for “popular, good value and accessible wines” are typically made in quantity, so some may still be around.
She seems to suggest that when it comes balancing reader vs. producer, arbitrariness and expediency must rule, even if the information given the reader is not information at all but something between a guess and wishful thinking.
And if “The majority of the wines in The Juice don't rely on vintage variation,” mustn't we assume that the majority of the ratings are mere speculation? Was Skinner the only person who knew what he was doing? Was there no editor wine-savvy enough to even query these “impossible” entries?
I have the uncomfortable feeling that, what with Skinner being an expert, it was thought safe and reasonable to simply take his ms. and toss it into the printing press without much editorial attention being paid. Bill Marsano
That's what you get when you make a “specialist” out of everybody. Sommelier stay in your restaurant! Filip, Belgium
Matt Skinner and Hilary Lumsden may indeed have a point. The sort of wines he is reviewing - beverage wines - are designed to a formula to be consistent from year to year.
But they should not have then listed a vintage and certainly not lied
about the vintage and definitely not tried to justify such action..
But surely if these are indeed formulaic beverage wines - and such
wines have their place - then the wines should be NV.
After all most Champagnes and Sherries are NVs. Warren Edwardes
I have just written a book called WineSpeak: A vinous thesaurus of (gasp!) 36,975 bizarre, erotic, funny, outrageous, poetic, silly and ugly wine tasting descriptors. Who knew?, now distributed by the Wine Appreciation Guild and available on Amazon and elsewhere. To get to 36,975 wine tasting terms I had to read and extract descriptors from thousands upon thousands of wine reviews. Many of them were just plain boring and repetitious; some were creative and imaginative; none that I am aware of was based on no tasting at all, as fraudulent a practice as doctoring up a wine to make sure (Robert M. Parker, Jr.) would love it and give it his rating of 90 or more. This deception by Skinner, and the defense of the practice by his publisher, Mitchell Beazley, are totally unacceptable. No self-respecting wine critic should ever expect to hold the public trust by so cavalier an attitude toward truth. Shame on them both, and on all others who practice the same deception. Bernard Klem
We are much too harsh on Matt Skinner. In the Hindu, Greek and Chinese pantheon of gods, there are still those who have not yet identified themselves. Mr Skinner should be praised for coming forward. And also for being so forward in his tasting notes. Poh Tiong Ch'ng , Singapore
So, exposed for being what he really always was: an over-confident Aussie neophyte with more skills in self-promotion than in actual wine knowledge or finesse. An Aussie amateur who was built up into something he never was by the wine media.Welcome to Mother Earth Matthew! James Cooke
While agreeing that recommending untasted wines falls into the same category as giving good reviews to unread books and unwatched plays and movies, I have to admit to some sympathy for Matt Skinner. From 1987 to 2004, I was, for my sins, author of the Good Wine Guide, an annual buyer's guide and encyclopedia. The problem Hilary Lumsden refers to - the time lag between tasting and publication - was one that we confronted every year. In the end, we made the book as timely as we could by working to deadlines that were more like those used for magazines than books - and typesetting the Guide as it was being written and edited. Working in this way enabled us to kiss goodbye to the text in August in order for the book to hit the shops in November. But many of the best wines were still unavailable by the time readers got around to trying to buy them in December or January.
The solution to this dilemma, however, is now available in the shape of e-books like Amazon's Kindle. In the future, authors of guides like Skinner's and mine and their editors, should be able to update them over the lifetime of the book and to publish them electronically. Quite frankly, these books, like airport novels, do not warrant the felling of trees - any more than the most basic wines warrant the use of bottles and corks. Robert Joseph
“There's the side that wants the most up-to-date information.” Up-to-date information on wines that Mr Skinner has not even tasted? Please stop taking us for granted. Ever thought of apologizing instead of finding ridiculous excuses? Ben Longhurst, New Zealand
We in South Africa have a very popular guide, Platters, which also experiences a time pressure between bottling and publication deadlines. However they do not just make up fairy tale notes, they put there "untasted for this edition" or something similar and refer you to the previous vintage's notes.
Customers are paying for the book, and for Skinner to act as their agent. For him and his publisher to try and pass this off as a non-issue is as worrying as the initial offence itself.
What do Hugh Johnson and Jancis Robinson think of their publisher's handling of this issue? Rob Boyd, South Africa
Skinners conduct is quite inappropriate and very unprofessional. He may as well be selling cars or vacuum cleaners now that he is just a salesman with a few standard clichés. Do give the wine growers and wine makers a slight courtesy by trying their produce before passing an alleged informed observation. Money talks! David Gibbons, Sydney
It is very unfortunate to see a fellow wine writer getting himself into a sad situation. Matt Skinner made a mistake but let's not crucify him for that. We all have made bad judgement calls under pressure. As in St John, 'he that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone'. What's disappointing, however, is the way he and the publisher (there goes my future book deals with Mitchell Beazley) responded rather casually with an air of arrogance. What really matters is not that we make mistakes but how one deals with a situation afterwards. That truly shows one's character. Sam Kim, Auckland, New Zealand
Look! I can only commend Michael Skinner, sorry, Matt Skinner, for his preternatural talents. I, too, have wondered about the differences between vintages of New Zealand wines, and can only conclude that when you've tasted one, why, you've tasted an awful lot of them. And Margaret River has always been far too sensitive when it comes to personal comments. I, personally, have found her very attractive, but to suggest that she has attributes that deserve the sort of outrage that her devotees feel appropriate is to reveal the hubris which some critics have been fearful of publicising. Let me say now that, in the face of diminishing publicity, her tantrums are utterly out of proportion to the supposed, and largely fictitious, offense.
Anyway, why pillory an expert who obviously knows his wines inside and out? For example, I have yet to taste the 2008 Burgundies, but I know what they will be like, as anyone who has any experience will be able to appreciate. And, as one of your correspondents so presciently observed, I can, without hesitation, recommend the 2008 Chateau Latour; in fact, of the same year, also Margaux, Haut Brion, Lafite, Mouton, etc., etc. So why pick on the hapless Mr. Skinner? He is doing his job, perhaps not as strictly rigorously as some purists would prefer, but as best a severely damaged soul can manage. Give him a chance, then ease him into a less challenging line of work, perhaps restaurant reviewing. Sam Chafe, Melbourne, Australia.
If the majority of wines don't rely on vintage variation then why do they publish the book every year! Nothing but a scam treating the public like fools. Danny Spencer
Oh my! I am shocked--shocked--that there are critics reviewing that which they have not seen, tasted, smelt, heard or touched. As we say in my corner of North America, gimme a break! As for standardized wines, they should be bottled as NV, just like fizzy lemonade or Diet Coke. There are so many wines and so little time--so why buy a book when you can get Decanter online? Or maybe have the critics blog instead of book. Lewis C Taishoff
Register on decanter.com absolutely free for news alerts delivered direct to your email inbox, and our fortnightly newsletter with advance notice of what’s coming up in Decanter magazine, offers, competitions and more.
PLUS registration is a one-stop shop for the Decanter magazine Archive and Decanter Fine Wine Tracker.
I am always ready to recommend Latour without having tasted it!! Who are these so-called specialists?? Nils Stormby, Malmo, Sweden
