In a recent column, Matt Kramer of The Oregonian and Wine Spectator, suggested that consumers "snap up 2006 pinot noir soon; '07s probably will be thin". In his feature, Matt highlights a single Oregon pinot noir from the 2006 vintage, suggesting this be the yardstick for measuring the quality of the 2007 vintage:

Brooks Pinot Noir "Janus" Willamette Valley 2006: With the preceding remarks in mind, let me be blunt: You want to snap up the remaining 2006 pinot noirs from Oregon while they're still around. The reason is simple, if painful: Oregon's 2007 pinot noirs are emerging as rather light, sometimes excessively thin wines that may prove to be overpriced for their quality.

It's no surprise Matt might feel this way about the 2007 vintage, considering his basis for comparison is a 14.7% (yes, that's almost 15% alcohol) powerhouse 2006 pinot that had been aged 11 months in 40% new oak (here are Brooks winemaking notes in PDF download format). With this frame of reference, Matt goes on to describe the 2006 vintage in this manner:

Meanwhile, savvy buyers are seeking out the 2006s. And why not? Oregon's 2006 vintage created rich, full, slightly soft pinot noirs that are delicious and immediately pleasurable. It was a universally successful vintage. That, in sum, is the tasty story of the really lovely Brooks Pinot Noir "Janus" Willamette Valley 2006.

Now, this is where I believe wine critics need to stop thinking that their subjective taste translates into either a standard of quality that should be accepted by all or the blind assumption that their assessment of a vintage is the last word. Granted, it's implicit in Matt Kramer's review and his association with Wine Spectator that he is going to favor fuller, richer wines; those that show well on their own, most often the ones exhibiting ripe fruit, a presence of oak, and higher alcohol (e.g., Brooks Janus 2006).

For the record, my reasons for taking Matt Kramer to task on his column have nothing to do with this preference in wine in general or Oregon pinot noir in particular. I respect the fact that he and I clearly differ on our assessments of the 2007 Oregon pinot noir vintage. My issue is that he fails to cite explicitly his bias toward full, rich, ripe wines.

Again, his preferences are implicit in the praise he has for the Brooks "Janus" Pinot Noir 2006, but even still, if Matt is going to state that the "07's probably will be thin" in his headline and then suggest that "savvy buyers are seeking out the 2006s", where is the disclosure on how and why he reaches such a conclusion?

I would characterize myself as a "savvy buyer", but have a completely different preference in Oregon pinot noir than that of Matt Kramer. In fact, the last thing I want to do is stock up on the 2006 vintage, for I found this to be far too ripe, too full, too alcoholic, too everything for my taste. That said, there were exceptions to this, as duly noted in my wine recommendations that include a number of 2006 Oregon pinots.

But that's not the point I am trying to raise, for it is the approach taken when assessing wine combined with the inherent bias one's subjective palate brings to the occasion, that requires full disclosure.

For example, as cited many times on this blog, my assessments of each wine covered here at BeyondtheBottle.com are done by pairing each bottle with food, rather than tasting through a multitude of glasses at one setting. I've been there and done that, which has left me with nothing to go on other than a selection of wines to consider at my next cocktail party where food is not the focus, but drinking is.

I'll put it this way: if you're going to write about wine for a living or even if you're doing it as a hobby, then please do us a favor by offering more transparency around your tasting preference as well as your approach toward assessing wine. Please let us know the larger context in which you come to any broad stroke dictates on what is supposedly good versus what is not.

We, the wine consumer, deserve more transparency. And we're catching on to the influences and biases that some may think they can still hide. Thanks to the blogosphere, an increasing number of bright shining lights are now exposing this for what it is, just another subjective opinion no different from my own and that of many others who enjoy wine according to their own terms.