High-Tech Searching, Part 2
Dec 19, 2007 |
John (12) |
Founders, How-to |
2 comments
For starters, most of the options that pop out after clicking "Search Options" are straightforward. You can control maximum price, vintage, wine type, bottle size, and which retailers you are searching -- all in a simple fashion. However, the last option, "Search Style" can be potent yet confusing, and therefore deserves some explanation.
Search Style: "AND - Price Sort"
Using this style of search (which is the default), Vinquire requires that every term you search for exists in the returned wines. This means users should not enter too many terms when searching. We touched on this in the first post, but it can't be emphasized enough: start searching with the least amount of terms that will still identify the wine—you can always add more terms to the search if you get too many erroneous results.
But what about the "AND - Price sort" part? Price sort simply means that we're going to sort the wine results on price: from low, to high. This is our default style of search, and we do this to help you find wine at the best price. The downside is that we require every search term to exist in the results, which can limit results. This is why we have a second option.
Search Style: "OR - Relevancy Sort"
This style search does not require every search term to exist when we display wines. Use this search style when you are getting limited search results using the "AND" search style.
For example, let's say you're a sucker for punishment and really want to get your hands on a bottle of Kosta Browne Pinot Noir Sonoma Coast, Kanzler Vineyard. If you use the default "AND" search for that, you get limited results. However, if you change it to the "OR" search, good things happen and you might be able to land a bottle. This works because with the "OR" search, we don't require every single term you searched for to exist. We'll do our best effort to match as many terms as we can, but we won't guarantee that every term in your wine search will exist in every result.
So why not do all searches with "OR - Relevancy sort"? If you use this search style, some of the returned results may not be the wine you were searching for. Buyer beware—you will need to verify that the wine we returned really is the exact wine you are looking for. With the Kosta Brown search, we might leave off Kanzler. That word is important so you will have to be careful. Additionally, we no longer can sort these results by price. So you will manually have to go through the returned wines and find the best price yourself.
The upshot is that if you are trying to find a specific or rare wine, or in general are getting poor search results, you can use the "OR" search and get a broader view of what our database offers.
The Next Level:
So far, we're still not hitting the "high-tech" angle. Let's go back to our quest for the Kosta Browne. I mentioned above that the "OR" search doesn't require all search terms to exist in the wines, but let's say we want to guarantee that the word Kanzler is in every result. If you add a '+' before the word Kanzler, then the "OR" search will force the word Kanzler to exist in all search results.Using the '+' operator can help you refine your results when using the "OR" search style.
Finally, all of the operators like '~' and '*' detailed in the last advanced search blog will work when using the "OR" style search as well. Happy hunting.
Founders, How-to |
2 comments |
Top Wines of 2007
Dec 19, 2007 |
John (12) |
Wine Industry |
24 comments
Spectator gets so much traction from their list that it was only a matter of time until other publications got in on the action. The San Francisco Chronicle has a Top 100 of 2007 (with no scores only tasting notes). Wine.com's Top 100 is based solely how many bottles were sold from their online store. Not to be outdone, Wine Enthusiast makes not only a Top 100, but a Top 100 best buys in a monster PDF that would be so much nicer as an normal web page.
Does Vinquire make a Top 100 list? Of Course! It's our Top Ranked page, which is constantly updated with your reviewed wines. But for this blog, we're ready to just summarize what the big wigs of the industry think. Reproduced here are some of these lists with direct links to find the best prices.
Happy Holidays!
Wine Spectator 2007 Top 100 (only first 20)
Wine Spectator Top 100: Selections Under $20
Wine Enthusiast 2007 Top 100 (only first 20)
Wine Enthusiast 2007 Top 100 Best Buys (only first 20)
Wine.com Top 100 (only first 20)
Wine Industry |
24 comments |
Wine Blogging Wednesday: Petite Sirah
Dec 11, 2007 |
WineBlogWeds_Posse (2) |
Wine Tasting |
5 comments
Overall, some of us doubted that Petite Sirah could stand on its own. The core flavors were marzipan/licorice, some metallic iron, and a general wildness and disparity of elements—those who liked it call it "savage and brambly", those who didn’t simply called it uneven and inconsistent. Our general opinion by the end: while the varietal has some potential, it clearly doesn’t stand on its own as a classic.
Now the reviews!
Tier 1: Our two favorites were quite clear:
Santa Cruz Mountain Vineyards Durif, McDowell Vineyards, 2004
Avg points 87.4
We felt like this one was the truest expression of the varietal.
Nose: rust, iron, marzipan, soy sauce, smoke
Mouth: Tart, licorice, smoke, heavy bodied, salted plums
Finish: Evolves from licorice to tar
Storrs Petite Sirah, Santa Cruz Mountains, 2004
Avg points 85
Nose: mineral and blood
Mouth: blackberry and brambly fruits, savage and wild with lots of spice
Finish: a bit hot and burning, with notes of unripened berries
Tier 2: The middle-of-the-road wines:
Huntington Petite Sirah, 2005
Avg points 84
Note: for 2 of us, this was in the top two!
Concannon Petite Sirah, Central Coast, 2004
Avg points 83.75
A nice California-style wine, that still had some of the marzipan and licorice that we decided was the Petite Sirah core. A decent everyday wine but with little character.
Bogle Petite Sirah, 2005
Avg points: 83.75
An easy to drink, fruit forward, with a hint of peppercorn, and generally more consistent wine that most of us agreed stood out: it had a very different, smoother, character than the other wines we tasted.
Amphora Petite Sirah, Dry Creek Valley, Mounts Vineyard, 2004
Avg points 83
We decanted this for a while, since it was so tight and tannic when we first tasted it. But after two hours, it hadn’t opened up much. It was a very meaty red, inky, blueberry jam and dried overripe blueberries, with a very tight, astringent finish.
Fearless Petite Sirah, Central Coast, 2005
Avg points 80.66
To some of us, this smelled like a Pinot: vanilla and strawberry, sour cherries, tobacco, leather with notes of herbs de provence.
Stonehedge Reserve Petite Syrah, 2005
Avg points 79.5
Some of us (notably the person who bought this bottle) tried hard to like this wine—and even they failed! Avoid the 05, we have some positive feedback from the 03 though.
Oak Grove Reserve Petite Sirah, 2005
This turned out surprisingly Italian-style. Violet, camphor, salty caramel, with smooth mint and a tart finish. No average points … we were apparently getting tipsy!
Inheritance Petite Sirah, 2005
The dominant note was ether: sweet medicinal. The mouthfeel, though, was watery, and the finish short. What did I say about tipsy?
Wine Tasting |
5 comments |


Categories