Do Vintages Matter?

A freak June hailstorm swept through Napa Valley on Sunday. It knocked a few blossoms off a few vines here and there, but aside from a few growers who may have had their crop crimped, it's of little consequence, and certainly nothing on the scale of the frost that hit Bordeaux in April.

France's devastating spring frosts will cut into the crop size; Napa's hailstorm won't.

Most weather stories are of little or no consequence to consumers in terms of wine quality and production. By the time the grapes are picked and wines made, all will be forgotten.

What you should consider is how little variation there is in most vintages, especially in California. Gone for the most part are years of total busts, and you can find exceptional wines in even the weakest vintages, such as 2011 in California. I've met plenty of people who are thrilled by the 2011s.

As I taste the 2014 Pinot Noirs and Cabernets, quality is high for both years, and there are noteworthy achievements. But vintages hardly matter anymore. With most wine consumed within hours or days of purchase, it's more important to keep an eye on prices.

As I've suggested before, dropping vintage dates might be a good idea for many wines. The NV (non-vintage) associated with Champagne allows for blending years, and that's an idea worth exploring—it allows better quality wines to be sold in off years and helps maintain a more consistent house style. 

Vintage dates may add cachet and appeal to those who want to compare years. But after decades of tasting wines (and conducting retrospective tastings of those wines with age), my conclusion is that while there are standouts, predicting which ones will endure and rise is more dependent on the producer than the vintage.