The wines and spirits used for the Diploma exams held on Wednesday were posted to the WSET’s website. So, I went to check my answers against the actual samples.

For the sparkling wines, I was grateful to see that the first wine was indeed Prosecco, which is what I had changed my tasting note to reflect. I was not correct with the other two, misidentifying the Champagne with a Cremant de Loire and an Australian sparkler with Champagne. Oh well, I should receive partial credit on my notes and, fingers crossed, it will be sufficient for a pass. Maybe not a high pass, but a pass is a pass and I shouldn’t be greedy.

For the spirits, I seem to have gotten confused. The first was a flavored (bison grass) vodka from Poland, which I incorrectly identified as Rum. The next sample actually was a white Jamaican rum, which I thought was vodka. It’s sort of funny in one way, not so in another. Anyway, I really nailed the last one, not only correctly noting that it was a anise-flavored neutral spirit, but also identifying it as Pernod.

We have been advised that our scores will be sent to our program provider on January 17, which will then send them out to each candidate. Only then will I truly know how well or poorly I did.

I have been remiss in posting because I have been focused on studying for my exams, which were held yesterday. At 12:00 PM, I took the exam for Unit 5 of the Diploma of Wine & Spirits (Sparkling Wines of the World). I had thought this would be the easier of the two, the second being Unit 4 (Spirits of the World). However, I thought wrong.

Each exam followed the same format, which included a tasting of three blind samples and the completion of a comprehensive essay or three-part essay, for which each candidate was given a total of an hour to use as they wanted between the two tasks.

With the sparkle in sparkling wines having a certain transience, I began with the tasting portion first. As the samples had been decanted from the original bottles into a neutral wine bottle, some of their fizz had faded already, adding to the challenge. Upon nosing the first wine, I thought I detected a wet wool note, which would be a tip off for a Loire Valley sparkling wine made from Chenin Blanc. I wrote my tasting note with that in mind.

However, when I reached for the second glass, I found an aroma in it, which was different from the first, but also recalled wet wool. Now I was confused. I went back to smell the first glass and found it to be much fruitier and floral than I had found initially. Perhaps I had picked up the wet wool note from the second glass and attributed it to the first? I’m not sure, but I went back and revised my first tasting note, now thinking that it was Prosecco.

I then completed the second tasting note and had just started nosing the third wine when the half-way mark was called out by the proctor. I knew I was spending too much time on the tasting and would need to move quickly in order to have sufficient time to write the essay. Fortunately, I write quickly.

With the tasting behind me, I moved on to the essay, reading the question. In relation to sparkling wines, we were to comment on each of the three items listed. The first asked about a particular type of sparkling wine, the second about grapes used in another sparkling wine and the third about a region. I confidently wrote my answers to all three and hoped I would earn enough points on the written portion to make up for points I was sure I had lost on the tasting portion.

As I had had a conflict on the date on which the Fortified Wines course was given, I was spared having to take this exam at 2:00 PM, but the majority of my classmates soldiered on. I headed out into the rain to find lunch and waste time before the 4:00 PM Spirits exam. I was determined not to study anymore, with the belief that anything I didn’t already know, I wasn’t going to learn in the hour prior to the exam. I found a new book store and wandered around looking at various books and eventually purchasing a "gift" for myself — a book that wasn’t about wine or spirits!

Returning to exam headquarters, or more precisely, the International Wine Center, I found my seat and waited for the exam to start. Recalling my difficulty with time on the previous exam, I took a different strategy with this one. I decided to nose all the wines first before trying to guess what each one was. I also took a small, undiluted taste of each, to better experience the spirit. Additionally, I glanced at the essay question at the start and jotted down some notes on each topic. Again, it was a three-part essay question.

My nose, which had failed me earlier, seemed to be functioning much better this time. I also found it easier to identify aromas and flavors, whereas on the other, I felt a bit like a deer in the headlights struggling to name the things I was smelling or tasting. For whatever the reason, I felt much more confident in my spirit tasting, even if I may have mis-identified them. Fortunately, the identification is only a small percent of the total points awarded.

I dashed off answers to the spirits’ short-answer essay, trying to recall as much detail on each topic as I could. I probably threw in a few extraneous ones as well, but all in all, I felt that I was strong in each answer. Having paced myself much more wisely, I actually finished with five minutes to spare, providing me with time to review my work.

The exams will be sent to the WSET’s main office in London, where they will be graded along with all of the exams taken by Diploma candidates around the world yesterday. Thus, it will probably be a few months before I get my results, so I will put it all out of my mind until then. Meanwhile, I can spend the "down time" writing the second of my four papers and preparing for the grueling Unit 3 (Light Wines of the World).

This past weekend, I had the opportunity to present a seminar at the NY Wine & Food Expo in Tarrytown, NY.

While previous classes had been relatively small (5-15), I was advised to expect between 20-100 people. I was not adverse to teaching to a large crowd, but the wide variance in attendance made it difficult to plan for handouts, without needlessly killing trees and/or breaking the bank. We compromised with black & white, fewer slides and ~60 copies. In the end, we had between 45-50 people attend.

I presented our From Vine to Wine class, which usually runs 1.5-2.0 hours, but was required to edit it back to 45 minutes. We kept our usual tasting of five wines, but I omitted some of the more technical aspects of viticulture and vinification and spoke extremely quickly. I also had to alter my pedagogical style from a more interactive one to a lecture.

Despite the whirlwind of information thrown at them, the participants seemed to enjoy the class and a few people came up to me afterwards to pay me compliments. Accordingly, I am now looking forward to future opportunities in which I can present to large groups.

While speaking about Scotches, my husband’s grandfather recently asked why he had heard of single malts, but never of a double malt.

A single malt Scotch is one made from a single distillery and which contains only the distillate from malted barley. The more common whisky is the blended Scotch, which is made from several distilleries and includes distilled spirits from both grain and barley. More recently, with Scotch’s comeback, a very tiny category of vatted malts is finding its way to the market. Vatted malts are a blend from several different distilleries, but, like single malts, contain only the distillate from malted barley. Hence, the concept of a double malt doesn’t exist, which is why he had never heard of them.

My sister and I like to get together over a bottle of wine. Sometimes we even include dinner in our itinerary. We recently went to Landmarc restaurant in Tribeca, which is known for its relatively low markup on wines and a large selection of half-bottles. The food is very good as well.

My sister much prefers red wine, so we started with a Californian Pinot Noir, which wouldn’t compete with our salad selections. When that half-bottle had been finished, I returned to the wine list to make a new choice. My sister has previously shown a regard for full-bodied, fruity red wines, so I suggested a California Zinfandel. She blanched at the suggestion.

What’s wrong, I asked? I would think that you would like Zinfandels, given some of the other wines we have enjoyed together in the past. But I don’t like pale, sweet wines, she protested. Aha! The problem became crystal clear. My sister thought I was referring to "White Zinfandel," the great marketing success of Sutter Home (and also produced by others).

Trust me, I said and went on to explain that Zinfandel is indeed a red grape, whose parentage is linked to a variety, which originated in Croatia. It only appears on the shelves as a blush wine because people favored white wines in the 1970s (somehow thinking that white wines were healthier than reds) and it was too costly for vineyards to replant from one variety to the next. With a shortened period of leaving the juice on the grape skins just a glimmer of color is extracted. Hence, White Zinfandel was born. A clamor for a problem batch of wine which had a higher than usual residual sugar sealed its fate and became the ubiquitous White Zin, tarnishing the reputation of this bold and spicy RED wine.

The server brought out the new selection and, after tasting it and giving her the go ahead to pour, my sister’s glass was filled with deep, ruby liquid. I urged her to taste it and share her opinion. Yes, she was pleased. This was not the wine she initially thought it would be. I advised her that its synonym was Primativo, should she dine out in an Italian restaurant, the other "home" of the Zinfandel grape.

Whether she cared for the history and geography lesson, I can’t say, but by the end of the evening, there wasn’t any wine left in the bottle or in her glass.

Last night, I had the wonderful opportunity to attend one session from Kevin Zraly’s Windows on the World wine class. Kevin’s corresponding text was the first wine book I ever read, copyright 1985 (I read it in the early 1990s). Someday I am going to get him to sign it for me. It is a great read, especially for consumers, and a more current edition (2006) is available.

The class topic was red wines from Burgundy and Cotes du Rhone. Kevin is a lively instructor and really gets the class excited about learning and tasting.

As Kevin kept reminding his audience, the main red grape in Burgundy is Pinot Noir and we tasted six different Burgundian Pinot Noirs. The other red grape from Burgundy is Gamay, but its production is primarily limited to Beaujolais, which we also tasted, along with two Rhone wines.

The first Rhone wine (which was the penultimate wine) was a Crozes-Hermitage, which represented the Northern Rhone and was a bargain at $15. The second and last wine was a Chateauneuf du Pape, which hails from the Southern Rhone, and was the only blend of the evening, Chateauneufs being permitted to include 13 different varieties of grapes.

All of the wines were quite good and we were privileged to taste a Grand Cru Burgundy (my notes are at home, so I can’t recall in which vineyard it was born) from the 1999 vintage, which came directly from Kevin’s own cellar.

As with all things Grand Cru (especially Grand Cru Classes), it was superb, probably my favorite wine of the evening. But, at an estimated $125 (if you can even find it), I won’t be drinking much of it in the future. The Premier Crus are often better values and as Kevin noted, the Village level wines from the villages with the highest number of Grand Crus are an excellent choice in hedging one’s bets and pocketbook.

Unfortunately, I have neither the time, nor the energy, just now to provide a detailed explanation of the levels within Burgundy. However, in a nut shell, Village level wines (just list the name of the village on them) can come from grapes grown anywhere in the village and may not be the best ones.

Premier Cru wines (include the name of the village, followed by the name of the vineyard) are made from grapes from that particular vineyard, which was rated as "Premier Cru" due to the soil and microclimate.

Grand Cru wines will often just have the name of the vineyard (be careful, there is a lot of overlap in village names and vineyard names) on the label and are produced from the most highly rated "Grand Cru" vineyards.

At my Sparkling Wines of the World class, the latter portion of the day was devoted to a mock exam, whereby we were presented with three blind samples on which to write tasting notes (and guess each wine’s origins) as well as write an answer to an essay question in an alloted 30 minutes.

The essay stated, "Great wine is made in the vineyard. Explain how this is true in Champagne." My unedited response, which I read aloud for the class, follows:

"Great wine is made in the vineyard." While it is vinification that actually produces the wine, it is only through the precise balance of all factors that a truly great wine can be made. This notion is particularly evident in the Champagne region of France, which produces the greatest sparkling wines in the world. Though other regions are known for making good sparkling wines, it is the unique terroir of Champagne that is responsible for the high quality of wines that are so highly regarded.

The unique terroir of Champage can be attributed to several factors, which include the grape varieties, climate, geography of the region, viticultural practices and the soil. Particularly, it is the limestone, chalky soils of Champagne that form the best vineyards. These soils impart the mineral quality of Champagne wines. The chalky whiteness also helps to reflect light onto the grapes, helping to ripen them.

The climate itself, which is marginal at best, actually adds to the quality of the wine by ensuring that the grapes don’t overripen. The cool, continental climate means that the grapes must contend with winter kill and spring frost. However, it also retains the crisp acidity in the grapes that do survive and mature. This acidity plays a key role in the flavor of the wine as well as in retaining a low alcohol level, permitting the secondary fermentation to take place. 

The geography and topography are used to advantage to overcome some of the climate’s perils. Specifically, planting on hillsides and east-facing slopes increases sun exposure and adds to the warmth of the vineyard. Similarly, the viticultural practices of using Taille Chablis trellising and pruning help to protect the grapes from the cool temperatures. Other measures such as aspersion and spraying from helicopters provide further frost protection.

The viticultural practice proscribed for vine density of 6,000-10,000 vines/hectare results in quality grapes, as the vines compete with one another for space and nutrients. The blend of the three grapes themselves — Chardonnay, Pinot Noir and Pinot Meunier — are also responsible for the quality of the wine. These grapes each impart their own special qualities to the blend: acidity and finesse from Chardonnay; body and aromas from Pinot Noir; and body and a mushroom character from the Pinot Meunier. Together, they produce a wine that is more complex than the sum of its parts.

These aspects of Champage’s unique terroir conspire to produce high quality fruit that is well-suited to the vinicultural practices that follow in the production of a sparkling wine. Thus, the quality of the wine ultimately produced is a direct result of everything that went on in the vineyard prior to harvest. Consequently, great wine is indeed made in the vineyard.

Yes, this is a shameless plug, but I am so excited for my first real published work, that I just had to share it. My article on my experiences as a Diploma of Wine & Spirits candidate with the WSET appears in the latest edition of the Wine Press and is now available online. Enjoy!