Tim Hanni "dismisses" wine critique

I wonder if in building their hypotheses the economists with whom you work might be overlooking one major possibility - that to the effect that this 80% of consumers are neither lost, overwhelmed or intimidted, but simply don't give a good flying fig. That is to say, that as most people who visit museums have little formal education or of the language of the arts and their history, they simply do not care to know enough. Or, in a phrase, they ain't interested.
Rogov

Forgot to address this. We definately know there are some/many but no clue the numbers. We DO know that the 'migration patterns of the lost wine consumers' demonstrate they do move about, indicating a desire for something. What, when, how much and why is now the question! Then - what the heck can we do if anything. Restaurants and bars often DO NOT want to sell more wines to consumers who will plonk down $10-15 for a martini glass with a premium spirit and something to make it sweet! More $$ contribution in the register and double the margin then they get for a glass of wine. ROI for a $15 cocktail can equate to a $20-25 glass of wine. This accounts for a lot of the 'lost' $$. Plus you don't have to know the history, origin, descriptors and appropriate food...

Tim, this investigation into the whys and wherefores of sensory classifications, and why people drink what they drink and like what they like, is obviously fascinating.

What about the other concomitant of this? Not only do I like the wines, but I'm a fan of spirits and beers as well. And I've noticed that (albeit within perhaps a fairly narrow spectrum of the public) there's much more demand these days for the bitter components. Yes, the sweet cocktails are still out there, and will always be with us, but there are more and more 'tenders who are coming out with more and more complex and bitter-driven cocktails as well.

Do the bittermen fall into the ordinary sensitivity category, and therefore prefer the more complex tinctures and the bitter notes to stimulate their palates? I'm assuming so, since the sweeties and the hypers would likely be so overwhelmed by these bitters and amaris as to avoid them at all costs.

What's your take on that?

Do the bittermen fall into the ordinary sensitivity category, and therefore prefer the more complex tinctures and the bitter notes to stimulate their palates? I'm assuming so, since the sweeties and the hypers would likely be so overwhelmed by these bitters and amaris as to avoid them at all costs. What's your take on that?

We learned to take nothing for granted a long time ago. The real 'action' takes place in the brain and we all know what a screwy place that can be! The DEGREE of stimulation is dependent on the palate and intensity of the transmission of the stimulus. Positive reactions to bitterness can also be 'learned' so that is something always factored in. This is the neural plasticity. That being said almost never will you find a Sweet taster, ond only rarely a Hypersensitive, who can stand Scotch or Cognac. Many of the bitters are relatively mild and often very sweet. a Campari and soda is no stretch. Others - fuggedaboudit.

The more Tolerant you are as a taster the relatively (and generally) less you tend to perceive bitterness. So that would support your insight above. We are looking at not only wine but beer and spirits, in relatively general categories. The more Tolerant - the more skewed towards intense and extreme beers consumption becomes. A funny thought is the whole 'Tastes great/Less filling!' light beer bit may be explained by 'tastes great' to Hypersensative/Sweet tasters (physiological), 'less filling' appeals to the psychological aspect of either losing weight or drinking more!

We were more than a bit perplexed when Sweet and Hypersensitive tasters seemed be more apt to love the hot, spicy burning of the trigeminal irritation caused by capsacin, wasabi, etc. We went to the experts. "Oh, they are having orgasms as the brain dumps out endorphins, dopamine, etc. to provide relief." Okeydokey! Pass the Tabasco! Same as runner's high, why the chili extract is used in arthritis creams and also part of the sado-masochism complex....

Anyhooo. That's how all this goes.

Thanks.

Tim, I'm quite sure you realize that one (but only one) of the problems you're dealing with here is that your words are coming already freighted with meaning, and that inevitably gets in the way of understanding.

I'm referring, of course, to your designations. People often misunderstand what you're trying to say (and, yeah, I've seen you attempting to try to point out that they're misinterpreting) because of words like 'tolerant' and 'sensitive' and 'hypersensitive', and it takes a little while for them to "adjust" their perceptions to wrap their minds around things.

Or to quote "Princess Bride" the movie, "I don't think that word means what you think it means."

As usual, when you're developing new ways of looking at things, it's usually the old words that get in the way.

By the way, I'll be coming down to Holy Napa to see Lou and BL---maybe we can hook up. You've never fixed me lunch.

Yo ho Hoke - c'mon by; breakfast, lunch, dinner, coffee ANY time and love to see Lou and who is BL (sorry)?! Do you have dates yet?

I am a stickler for words and understand your point entirely. We were saddled with 'supertasters' and 'non-tasters' at the beginning of this odyssea and the words Sweet, Hypersensative, Sensative and Tolerant have been tried and tested for over 4 years now on line, in surveys, at events and beyond. They work great for the consumers this whole thing is intended for. It be US that takes longer to wrap ourselves around it, but not very long at all.

It be US that takes longer to wrap ourselves around it, but not very long at all.

As in "we have seen the enemy and he is us" a la Pogo?

Sorry "BL" is BettyLu, the better side of the Kesslers, as Lou will readily admit.

Tim, Hi.....

Curious. I'm wondering if your research is based primarily on surveys, interviews and other forms of self-interpretation or on the basis of MRI data. Wouldn't MRI scans show a great deal more and a great deal more quickly than a four year, multi-thousand sample?

With regard to the "new" words, which of course are not at all new but just old word given new meanings, would it not be reasonable and more easily understandable (to laymen and professionals alike) if you had simply made up a few new terms? By re-using old words might we not be talking about something like a mousse made of chicken salad? Not to misunderstand please...I adore mousses and I adore chicken salad but I really wouldn't my chicken salad made into a mousse. At least not,please, at our future lunch.

Best
Rogov

I'm still trying to figure how the hell they get a wine geek with a glass of wine through an MRI in the first place? They actually have to drink with straws. MRI data shows very specific cognitive function info, surveys tell us what 'the people' are actually doing.

We are looking at a lot of things and the fMRI mostly shows that when trained, the brain processes wine sensations in a completely different area. A University of Bordeaux study showed that when the participants saw white wine, the processing took place in the area of the brain associated with white wine and when they had the white wine, colored red and included with other red wines, the processing took place in the area where red wine descriptors were stored. The descriptors went from green apples, peaches figs and pears to cherries, plums and raspberries. Same wines. A relatively recent Stanford study did somthing similar with prices and scoring. These wines are $10-15; 80-85 points. Same wines, now told they are more expensive - up go the points!! No real surprise just interesting to see how the brain is working. Many, many limitations, variables and flaws but it is a fun area: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/93947.php and there are better writeups available. Lt is late.

I just received a very intersting paper literally this morning: Cork and talk: The cognitive and perceptual bases of wine expertise by Angus Hughson, School of Psychology, University of Sydney. He has conducted some fascinating studies I am just getting ready to dive into. I will se if I can share copies or segments if you are interested. At first glance it looks like there is very little, if any, perceptiual differences between a trained and untrained taster - the differences are mostly in descriptive capacities. AND it looks like the more highly trained experts are more likely to make mistakes in replications of descriptive analysis then the less trained subjects.

Because I work with so many groups of researchers we love to cross reference and correlate studies. At the end of the day for me it is all about - 'so what can we do with the information?' You will love the depth and detail of our work on words - I am trying to set up a meeting with George Lakoff at Berkeley - the guru of framing and metaphors. Watching his stuff on YouTube gets me all fired up!

BTW, I am a maestro of mousse! Seriously. Apprenticed in pastries, really strong garde mange background with a passion for chaude froide work that no one does any more. I make a roulade of scallop mousseline with smoked trout and fresh herbs in aiolli on a fennel slaw that will know your socks off. What is your favorite style in a more intense red? I will show you the magic of 'Flavor Balancing' - swear it will really mess with you mind! You get to pick a wine you love that will no way, couldn't possibly, ya gotta be sh@*&%ting me, never go with that dish. Let me know.

Another 'take' on the goings on from the perspective of the research epicenter - UC Davis:

PDF: http://theaggie.org/pdfs/20100209.pdf

HTML: http://theaggie.org/article/2010/02/09/wine-experts-seek-to-make-wine-industry-more-consumer-friendly