an ocean apart

The results from the young reds portion of yesterday's tasting are in, and I can't believe the difference between the U.S. and U.K. judges' preferences.

U.S. panel
1. Shafer Hillside Select 2001 / Ridge Monte Bello 2000 (tie)
3. Staglin Family Vineyard 2001
Lowest scores went to Joseph Phelps Insignia 2002 and Clos Du Val Reserve Cabernet Sauvignon 2000. (Ouch.)

U.K. panel
1. Stag's Leap Wine Cellars Cask 23 2001
2. Ridge Monte Bello 2000
3. Joseph Phelps Insignia 2002 / Clos Du Val Reserve Cabernet Sauvignon 2000 (tie)
And the lowest scores went to Staglin and Shafer.

Obviously, Ridge kicks serious ass on both continents. But look at the other wines! You've got the ginormous, lusty California cult wines at the top in the U.S., while the U.K. favors a more elegant winemaking style.

The same is true if you read wine publications from both countries. The U.K.'s Decanter criticizes high-octane wines from Napa, while U.S. mags like Wine Spectator and Wine Enthusiast continually give these the highest scores. Then of course, there's the clash between Hugh Johnson and Robert Parker.

I honestly don't know if there's a resolution to this. In the end, it all comes down to personal preference, and I would encourage people to go beyond what critics and judges recommend (no matter which country they're from) and go by your own palate. In many ways, wine reminds me of my former life trying to get fiction published: It's so damn subjective. That's what's frustrating about it. But that's what's intriguing and exciting at the same time.

I, personally, tend to agree more with the U.K. palate -- I like my wine elegant, balanced and easy to pair with food. (And since I only weigh 105 pounds, big, high-alcohol wines aren't good for me!) I like slightly earthy flavors and being able to taste terroir.

But that's me. That's what I think. And not everyone will agree with me. But in the end, does it matter?