Right, most of the wine was in the price range. Two people brought two bottles, one in the price range and the other wildly out of it. Oddly enough, both of those scored the highest. Just goes to show we have crappy taste in wine.

I'd also like to comment on what steve said about it being the "perfect" wine. If you decant it or leave it open for an hour or two, it certainly opens up. Otherwise, it is just so-so. The high score (also for the Stag's Leap) was most likely because the wine had a chance to breath. I'm sure both wines benefitted greatly from the extra prep time.

Of course, this wasn't that controlled of an experiment. <winesnob>White Merlot and Cabernet in the same taste? Pfff.</winesnob>

The Stag's Leap still beat the Chuck, Steve. Are you hitting the Chuck already?
posted by Joel at 7:02 AM

Hey, someone cheated!

2000 Stag's Leap Merlot $31.99

Which makes the Two Buck Chuck placement even more amazing. It's the perfect wine!

posted by Steve at 4:02 PM

We did a blind wine tasting at my brother's birthday party last night. If you want to pick a wine that goes with drinking a lot of other wine, here's your guide:

Order Tasted	Wine	Score
10	Stag's Leap, Merlot, 2000	49.5
11	Two Buck Chuck, Cabernet Sauvignon, 2000	48.0*
2	Navarro, White Reisling, 1998	43.5
9	Danicing Bull, Zinfindel, 2001	43.0
3	Trinity Oaks, Merlot, 1999	39.0
8	Beringer, White Merlot, 2001	36.5
5	Braren Pauli, Port, 1997	33.0
6	Pierdon, Bordeux, 2000	32.5
4	Isabel, Sauvignon Blanc, 2002	27.7
1	Peirano Estate, Zinfandel 1998	26.5
7	Harrison, Cabernet Sauvignon, 1992	17.0**

* The Two Buck Chuck was a $2 bottle of wine. Yummy.
** This bottle appeared to have spoiled, as evidence by the wet cork and foul, cheese-like odor. Masochists, we tasted it anyway.

Each wine was sampled, and rated on a scale of 1-5 (despite objections, we did NOT accept a score of 0) by the 11 participants. The score is out of a possible 55 points. Nearly all of the bottles were within the price range of $8 to $16.
posted by Joel at 5:39 PM