An unnamed spokesman for major cork supplier Amorim recently stated that: ‘unsupported assumptions about the levels of TCA and making cork the scapegoat are influencing people’s perceptions of wine faults’. So the cork lobby is now suggesting that faults other than cork taint are being incorrectly identified as cork-related. Amorim appears to base this view on the difficulties encountered by the 91 tasters who attempted to identify the faults in five wines presented at The Harpers Debate in London recently. None of the tasters actually managed to correctly identify the problems in all four faulty wines, one of which was cork taint. A sound wine was included as a control. I must question the choice of one of the faults as ‘mouldy bottle’, something which should never occur and which would be outside the experience of most wine professionals. However it’s worth noting that only two of the 91 correctly spotted the cork tainted bottle. My initial reaction is to question the professionalism and training of the 91 tasters, about which Amorim’s report in its Bark to Bottle newsletter fails to inform. Only one, an MW student at that, correctly called four out of five. But Amorim has a point. It’s no secret that the overwhelming majority of wine consumers simply cannot identify cork taint. So there is a real possibility that corks might be blamed for other faults which are more the maker’s responsibility.
