somm nonsense
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — SOMM
rhyzome1 — 11 years ago(March 11, 2015 09:09 PM)
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 mostat 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. -
-
rhyzome1 — 10 years ago(June 03, 2015 08:04 PM)
Actually, I was the first wine manager hired by the Ritz-Carlton, in 1983. Both my previous experience with restaurant service in France and my masters in BioChem helped me obtain the position.
Otherwise, it's your position that's ludicrous: an astrophysicist would not have the 'right' to tell an astrologer that astrology is nonsense unless he/she were to obtain an astrology degree for him/herself(whatever that might be!.
In other words, somms cannot, in general, explain how wine things happen. Rather, their curriculum is based upon commercialized doubletalk: confusing flavin tri-ols for 'tannin', misunderstanding malolactic fermentation, promoting canards such as 'terroir' and 'wine is good for the health', etc
In short, they're nothing but minor nomenclatura for an industry that seeks to reduce all knowledge to what might go on the back of a bottle. -
crazyjestor — 10 years ago(February 17, 2016 12:48 AM)
Don't work as a somm but i've worked in the retail side of the industry for years. I can see what you're trying to say about the science behind the Flavor profile, but at the same time, there are certain characteristics in wine that help in terms of describing the wine. You argue against terroir but taste a New Zealand sauv blanc versus a sancerre and you'll clearly see a difference in taste due to the climate, region and soil. one time i was describing a entry level burgundy chard by describing the apple notes you can taste on the palate only to be told that the person the wine was for was allergic to apples. scientific explanations are one thing but 99% of people buying wine just want to know they're not buying a dud bottle, the science behind it be damned
-
rhyzome1 — 10 years ago(February 17, 2016 08:40 AM)
'Terroir' is a truth- claim that says that discreet environmental elements can be found in one particular place. That these claims were asserted to be true established the justification for the French appellation system, from 1935.
Yet the basis of these claims the elements themselveswere never tested. Moreover, exhaustive testing between 1975 and 1988 by French university labs turned up negative: No discreet environmental factors exist that would produce a unique outcome.
Anecdotal justification for terroir invariably turns to personal experience; yours, for example, is the self-assured ability to distinguish Sancerre from Marlboro. Now the problem here is obvious: beyond the credibility issue that this distinguishing event really did occur, you confront the problem of method. For example, was the testing carried out in a clear, repeatable way of say, seven unmarked bottles, of three Sancerre, three Marlboro and one dummy?
Then, of course, you have the INAO rules of making Sancerre that would produce a different outcome form that of Marlboro. What's amusing in this respect are the efforts of amerikan somm groups to bend the definition of 'terror' to include human factors. This, at best, is being daffy-nitional Republican
In this respect, your anti-science diatribe says it all. Understanding the difference between a bottle not to your liking and one that's simply bad is the whole point in grasping the science behind it. Otherwise, you are, indeed, left with maing idiotic statements that the presence of Brett is just a matter of taste-preference, and not a throw-it-away fault.
Invariably, I do find that those confronted with their ignorance of science will rely on the old chestnut that, to a customer,, it really doesn't matter. That, again, is nothing but republikan nonsense on par with a rejection of global warming and and espousal of creationism.
So here, it might be said that I'm not out to convince, but rather to simply demonstrate what fools wine-people really are. The public needs to know that these peeple are in no way experts in anything but self-serving beep -
FactUnderChecK — 10 years ago(April 04, 2016 05:11 AM)
Advance warning, I don't have any chemistry degrees but are you telling me environment/soil/nutrients/climate do not effect the produce of fruit bearing plants?
Because that is absurd. I may have misunderstood, but thats what I read into that.
I find it totally plausible that the same plant (for example) will produce a chemically altered fruit in contrasting environments. -
rhyzome1 — 9 years ago(April 04, 2016 06:29 PM)
Of course all of the factors you cited effect the fruit. And no, you don't have to be a chemist to understand this as this knowledge been part of the transmission of human culture for at least 20,000 years.
Rather, 'terroir' means that a specific, small plot of land produces unique grapes by virtue of a unique combination of known factors. This is demonstrable nonsense.
Basically, said factors are not only small in number, but it's also clear that all possible permutations of said factors can be found everywhere.
Somms, showing no interest in demystifying this commercialized French jibberish, willingly pass the terroir-based 'appellations' on to the public as 'knowledge'. This, they're forced to do in order to maintain the credibility of their junk degree. After all, it's what they've 'learned' and have been forced to repeat in order to enter 'the court'.
A fine title indeed,for the purveyors of arbitrary and non peer- reviewable standards. -
rhyzome1 — 9 years ago(April 26, 2016 04:53 PM)
PhD or otherwise, I'm informing the public that sommelier credentials are fraudulent. Now would anyone care to challenge me with facts to the contrary? Or must I be bombarded with drug-dependent, over-grown children such as 'Wes'?
-
MacacoBanditi — 9 years ago(April 29, 2016 06:47 PM)
Spot on. The whole contest is like testing whether someone knows about literature by learning the complete Webster dictionary by heart. Wine has nothing to do with the ego of that bunch of hack frauds. At the end of the day you can see they are really a bunch of losers with little to no culture. The only ones who believe in or take seriously the Master Sommelier rubbish are themselves. I know illiterate people with more wine culture than the whole bunch of self-important, annoying morons we are introduced to in this flick.
-
rhyzome1 — 9 years ago(June 01, 2016 01:12 PM)
Maceo, Thanks for responding. My motive for having written is in reference to the present-day job market, in which holders of MS, MW, and WNSET go to the top of the pile. So what i'm demonstrating, in essence, is their lack of qualificationat least by virtue of said 'degree.
Now all of this is really nothing but mafiosi-style blackmail, thereby befitting their origin in the basement of a San Fransisco tourist trap. It's all about paying a huge sum of money to aquire a junk degree that's regrettably considered to be legit by the un-suspecting employer. It's as if chiropractors overran a poor, developing country without access to either real medical services or the requisite knowledge as to what real medicine is all about.
Of course, it must be noted that accepting junk degrees penalizes those with both more talent and real, hands-on qualifications; this is the ostensibel un-fairness that compels me to write.
Back in the days prior to MS, etc, experienced servers who wanted to learn more about wine underwent a personal apprenticeship from the resident wine-person which, from 1984 to 1997 at the Ritz Carlton, Atlanta, was yours truly. I also won the 'wine-steward competition of the Atlanta Wine Festival in the only three years I entered over those with MS degrees.Then,I became their judge: on the average, they faired no better than those without the degree.
In terms of my offering training, I only accepted those who scored high on their performance review as given by HR/F&B. And although my classes were open to all, they were tough (example test question: what is the IUPC name for the chemical we call 'tannin', and why is referencing the real name important? Or an easier one: why does port tase as sweet as the grape juice that it's made from?).
Then, there was a hands-on apprenticeship in which the servers must now accomuidate themselves to serve the entire dining room-not just a station.
It's with a horrid amusement, then, that I've observed that the MS-certified people hardly ever venture out on to the floor. Rather, their stick-figure managers who spend their afternoons buying absurdly overpriced wiens that no one buys, thereby driving their employer into inventory debt.
I can literally run my hand, blindfolded, over a somm-inspired wine list and visyualize the idiocy of it all. 'Nothing or very little there to buy and to enjoy, but rather a sop for a Wine Spectator 'Award of Excellence
So where, finally, do I see spead-sheet and cost control training in the program? Rather, nothing but slurp, spit, and a total lack of real accountability.