Riesling Classification at Finger Lakes Int'l

The Riesling results at this year's Finger Lakes are reported in terms of 3 sweetness levels: Dry (0 - .75 RS), Semi-Dry (.75 - 2.0) and Semi-Sweet (2.0 - 4.0). This is interesting in light of discussions here about what constitutes Dry Riesling. Are other competitions using this system? While it seems to me a move in the right direction, the consumer might find it all a bit confusing. Someone wanting to try, say, the Miles Semi-Dry Riesling that won a Gold probably isn't going to find Semi-Dry on the label.

The range from .75 to 2.0 is actually quite wide, especially when one accounts for variabilities in acidity.

[David M. Bueker]

The ranges for the first two are not that far off of the legal requirements on German trocken & halbtrocken Rieslings. So while they may not use the exact same ranges, the Finger Lakes classification is far from unique.

If one wants to regulate when to put “descriptive terms” such as “Dry” or “Semi-Dry” Riesling on the label one also has to be concerned with the “finished” TA of the wine (as Howie pointed out in his post) and the actual ripeness level and quality of the fruit used to produce the wine. When forcing or requiring the wine producers to use the term “Dry” or “Semi-Dry” (especially when it comes to Riesling) on the label, the wine has to be perceived “that way” by the “majority” of possible tasters.
In the case of Howie entering his home made Riesling in the NYS Home Wine Competition, just because the wines fall into a given range of RS doesn’t necessarily automatically make the wines fall into the “semi-dry” wine category.

Salute

[David M. Bueker]

If one wants to regulate when to put “descriptive terms” such as “Dry” or “Semi-Dry” Riesling on the label one also has to be concerned with the “finished” TA of the wine

Indeed, one need only look at Alsace, where a Rieslings with 15 g/l of residual sugar (1.5%) tastes much sweeter than most German Rieslings (esp. Mosel versions) with the same RS level. The acid levels in Alsace are generally quite a bit lower.

Taking TA as well as RS into account so that taste is better aligned with the descriptive categories (Dry, etc.) used for Riesling makes sense, but the competitions don't do it. A Riesling with .9 RS entered in the NYS Home Wine Competiton is classified as Dry, regardless of TA. In contrast, a .9 Riesling entered in the '08 Finger Lakes would be a Semi-Dry. Moreover, my not-so hypothetical consumer (me) wanting to buy the Miles Riesling that won a Gold at Finger Lakes would be better off being told what the label on the wine actually says than that is was categorized in the competition as Semi-Dry. This is a separate matter from TA.

Whether Finger Lakes changed its system just this year isn't clear. I couldn't find anything on their site about the RS levels defining the same categories in previous years. Does anyone know? Interestingly, Riesling is the only varietal for which it uses the 3-category system.

The range from .75 to 2.0 is actually quite wide, especially when one accounts for variabilities in acidity.

Howie,

It's just about the same range for Brut Champagne.

I wonder why people don't seem to complain about that?

If one wants to regulate when to put “descriptive terms” such as “Dry” or “Semi-Dry” Riesling on the label one also has to be concerned with the “finished” TA of the wine

Indeed, one need only look at Alsace, where a Rieslings with 15 g/l of residual sugar (1.5%) tastes much sweeter than most German Rieslings (esp. Mosel versions) with the same RS level. The acid levels in Alsace are generally quite a bit lower.

Exactly. Just going by RS is deceiving.

In the end Dan it’s not the “genotype” of the wine but its “phenotype” that matters. All these competitions leave the responsibility to entry the wine in the appropriate class or category up to the entrant or winemaker. . So if you want to better your chances of receiving recognition its best to go by the wine’s “phenotype” and not so much a wine’s “genotype”.

Salute

Great distinction Victor! I didn't know that in the end it's up to the winemaker to decide which category is most appropriate. My Riesling in the NYS Home last year was right around 1.0 RS and I wasn't sure whether to enter it in Dry or Semi-Dry. What you are saying, I think, is that the decision should be made by taste rather than number.

In the long run (post all of us), I'd like to think that taste will be able to be expressed by a number. But until such time (if ever) it's more sensible to go with the best we have (taste) rather than a very imperfect number. Thanks for moving the discussion in this direction.

[David M. Bueker]

In the long run (post all of us), I'd like to think that taste will be able to be expressed by a number.

Why wait? It already is: 95, 87, 92, 94, 88, 90, 89.

Looking at the wine’s “genotype” as a whole (all the “final numbers”- Alc %, RS, TA, Dry extract (non-sugar), pH) does tell you something about the wine’s “phenotype”.

Salute

[David M. Bueker]

Looking at the wine’s “genotype” as a whole (all the “final numbers”- Alc %, RS, TA, Dry extract (non-sugar), pH) does tell you something about the wine’s “phenotype”.

Salute

But in a very cold, analytical way that doesn't allow for that element of surprise. A wine is seldom the sum of its numbers.

A wine is seldom the sum of its numbers.

Who says it ever is, or that the actual mathematical function is a sum, or that all the things that need to be measured are known at this time?

92, 85, 83, 91 ... are not real numbers, they are pretenders, known as nominals.

[David M. Bueker]

A wine is seldom the sum of its numbers.

Who says it ever is, or that the actual mathematical function is a sum, or that all the things that need to be measured are known at this time?

92, 85, 83, 91 ... are not real numbers, they are pretenders, known as nominals.

Did you miss my joke?

One can just look at the “actual” or “measured” RS content and determine what “sugar classification” the wine is in, but to determine what classification the wine is in (regarding perceived “sweetness” or "absence of sweetness") one has to look at RS , TA., alcohol content, and intensity of “fruitiness”. In the same way one can look at alcohol content alone to determine what “alcohol classification” the wine is in, but to determine whether or not the wine will be perceived as “hot” or not one has to look further.

Salute

One can just look at the “actual” or “measured” RS content and determine what “sugar classification” the wine is in, but to determine what classification the wine is in (regarding perceived “sweetness” or "absence of sweetness") one has to look at RS , TA., alcohol content, and intensity of “fruitiness”. In the same way one can look at alcohol content alone to determine what “alcohol classification” the wine is in, but to determine whether or not the wine will be perceived as “hot” or not one has to look further.

Salute

Victor, therein lies the problem: wanting an answer in one number doesn't work with wine, and as David tried to jokingly point out, it doesn't work with rating wine either.