Why
there isn't enough Q in VQA Anymore
Gems at this week’s
Toronto Wine & Cheese Show
©
Michael Vaughan 2002
National Post Weekly Wine & Spirits Columnist
National Post • Saturday, March 16, 2002
 It
was exactly 30 years ago when Hugh Johnson author of the world’s best selling
wine book the World
Atlas of Wine let the bomb fly while being interviewed by the
BBC. When asked about Canadian wines, Johnson replied that Ontario’s wines
were the worst he had ever had. “The
foulness of taste is what I remember best – an artificial scented, soapy
flavor. It’s not in my Atlas.”
Fortunately, all
that has changed - not only are Ontario wines featured in today’s Atlas,
but they are also capturing a bevy of international awards. Part of the process
was growing the right grapes in the right areas. That and better winemaking were
critical in bringing our wines up to snuff.
 The
VQA or “Vintners
Quality Alliance” founded in the late 1980’s was also
instrumental in focusing on the Q or “Quality”
part of the equation. Indeed, at one time there were two quality standards –
the prestigious gold label for wines of special merit and the regular black
label for the balance.
While
the gold label has been abandoned, the regular label carries on supported by a
VQA grading panel mostly made up of LCBO consultants. And that is where I have
become alarmed. Why? Because it has become increasingly self-evident that VQA
stickers are now popping up on all kinds of undeserving wines.
In
essence there are two problems. The first concerns the apparent increasing
number of defective wines (i.e. with excessive sulphur), which bear the VQA
medallion. The second is increased incidence of wines, which are technically
correct (i.e. flaw free) but rather poor qualitatively.
All
of this came home at last week’s Vintages April pre release tasting. In the
Catalogue you will find a two-page focus piece on five extremely disappointing
VQA entries from a newly opened winery. They’re the kind of wines that brought
back the immortal words of Toronto-born Christopher Plummer who said, “God,
they’re terrible, I had a glass … and my hand nearly fell off.”
And
it’s not just me, other tasters are in agreement. In fact, one attending wine
writer put an upturned wine glass (meaning “unfit to be drunk”) on top of every bottle presented. But that
is only the start of it.
Over
the past six months I have blind tasted almost a thousand Canadian wines. The
results are not good, especially for Ontario. In one competition alone, the
judges found a whopping 16% of the 500+ VQA wines to be seriously substandard.
This and the increasing number of flawed wines bearing the VQA label makes me
wonder what’s happened to the Q.
This
is serious because if VQA is supposed to represent “the standard of
excellence” then these very marginal medallion bearers are bound to damage
consumer confidence and ultimately sales. Indeed, the only way to maintain
consumer trust is to raise the medallion standards immediately.
It
is worth pointing out that in some regions of France and Italy, when a submitted
wine doesn’t make the “cut” it must be distilled and cannot be sold. This
strongly discourages producers from submitting mediocre wines for formal
appellation designation. Plonk is kept out of the system and sold as simple vin
de table.
While
everyone would agree that it’s almost impossible to make great wines every
year, the culprits appear to be a dearth of professional winemakers in an
expanding market combined with the VQA grading panel process itself. That was
borne out last week when I tasted medallion wines with a few VQA panel members
who wholeheartedly agreed that some were terrible.
 As
for the Food & Beverage Testing Institute of Canada judging for this
week’s Toronto
Wine & Cheese Show, one has to separate the wheat from the
chaff. With some 1,500 products being presented at the show, it’s critical not
to waste time (and tickets) on disappointing entries. To help, the list of 2002
award winners will be posted on my website next Monday. In all fairness, not all
wines were in the competition meaning that you may well make your own
discoveries.
 Starting
at the top, the best red of the show was the gold medal Southbrook 1999 Triomphe Cabernet-Merlot, a
well crafted blend of 50% Cabernet Sauvignon, 25% Cabernet Franc and 25% Merlot.
While five Ontario reds received medals in the $25+ class, this was the only one
that scored 90 plus points by all judges.
Some
14 Ontario reds in the $12-25 class, took medals. Many award winners huddled
around the $24.95 threshold level, including Thomas & Vaughan 2000 Merlot, Kacaba Vineyard 1999 Cabernet Franc, Rief 1999 Meritage and both Southbrook 1999 Lailey Vineyard Cabernet Franc
and 1999 Cabernet Sauvignon. The less
expensive silver medal winners included Cave
Spring 1999 Cabernet ($15.95),
the idiosyncratic Henry of Pelham 1999 Baco Noir Reserve
($21.95) and the bargain priced Hernder
1999 Cabernet Franc at only $12.95.
Looking
at the reds in the under $12 class, there were six Ontario medal winners. Lakeview Cellar 2000 Gamay Noir
($11.95) and Henry of Pelham 2000 Cabernet Foch
($10.45) were two impressive solid silver medal winners.
Moving
on to the whites, there were no awards whatsoever in the over $25 class. The
real news was in the $12-25 whites where only one gold medal was awarded out of
61 entries to an Ontario Riesling – the off-dry Hernder
2000 Riesling Reserve ($13.95).
Ironically,
in the under $12 range, two of the four golds were also Rieslings: the
deliciously dry 2000
Marynissen 2000 Riesling ($11.95) and Pilliteri
2000 Riesling Off-Dry ($9.95).
 While
Ontario Chards didn’t fare all that well this year, Sauvignon Blanc did. The Southbrook 2000 Triomphe Sauvgnon Blanc
($17.95) showed extremely well as did the Strewn
2000 Sauvignon Blanc ($11.95). Both got silver medals.
In
the rosé department, Ontario picked up two of the three medals. The off-dry Thirty Bench 2000 Mountainview Blush
($10.95) got gold, while Pilliteri
2000 Cabernet-Merlot Rose ($9.95) was awarded a silver.
Of
the 17 late harvest entries, Reif
2000 Special Select Late Harvest ($17.00 half bottle) struck gold.
 Finally,
when it came to icewines with 28 entries (all half bottles), only two were
outstanding. The best of show was Henry of
Pelham 2000 Riesling Icewine ($54.95), closely followed by the smoky Strewn 2000 Riesling Icewine ($64.00). The
moral is buy and taste selectively.
The
Toronto Wine & Cheese Show starts this
Friday March 22nd at noon and runs through Sunday at the
International Centre (for further information Press
Here). The complete
list of all award winners will be posted on the Food & Beverage Testing
Institute of Canada website on Monday, March 18th. Those wishing
to get the full list of all results for all wines can do so by accessing
the SUBSCRIBER ONLY
section of the website Press
Here. As a special incentive, those who commit to subscribing
to Vintage Assessments today will receive a special $15 free pass to the show.
To subscribe Press Here
From the Archives:
To
see Michael Vaughan’s focus piece on Ontario wines that appeared
in
the
October 1974 issue of Toronto Life Magazine
PRESS HERE
To
see the feature A Vintage Year for Canada's Wines that appeared in
the
October-November
1975
Foodservice &
Hospitality Magazine
PRESS HERE
VQA Backgrounder:
The following is reprinted from the VQA
Newsletter July 2001
http://www.vqaontario.com/about/about.html
Resubmitting samples [of rejected wines]
Early summer is a busy time of year
for the VQA Ontario approval process. With the increasing number of submissions,
we have
seen a proportional increase in samples that are not approved either due to
laboratory or tasting results. Common causes of failure of the taste
test are post-fermentation odours, papery odours and cloudiness or sediment in
the wine. Unacceptable laboratory results are typically high SO2 or high
turbidity. Many
of these failures are recoverable and the wine may be re-submitted for a
re-testing of the
single element
for which it failed to pass.
If you are re-submitting a wine, here’s how to make sure the process
runs smoothly:
Prepare
and bottle a sample that represents the finished wine.
Prepare a brief covering note requesting a specific re-test and
describing any treatments that the wine has undergone to correct the reported
reason for failure.
Make
a copy of the original application form and write the VQA # assigned during the
first test in the top right hand corner. This
number will appear with the original results or can be obtained from VQAO.
Write
in large letters "For resubmission — taste test only" or "For
resubmission — turbidity test only" or whatever specific test is
appropriate across the top of the form.
Deliver
your wine to LCBO’s Quality Assurance department along with a copy of the
cover letter and application form.
Send
by fax a copy of the cover note and approval form to VQA Ontario so that we can
follow up on the results.
If
there is a charge for the re-submission, you will be invoiced at a later date
|
