Tasting etiquette at large, crowded walk-around tastings

I attend many so-called "walk-around" tastings and there are a few things that really annoy me about this type of event. This is one of my pet peeves: People who get a sample of wine to taste, and then just stand there tasting the wine and chatting with the person pouring the wines. If we all did that, nobody would have a chance to taste more than a mere fraction of the wines. When you are at a tasting where there are dozens or hundreds of wines being poured, don't just stand there; get out of the way so somebody else can taste some wines. You can do your learning and evaluation of the wine away from the table.

Here's how to do it properly: walk up to the table, and when it's "your turn," get the sample of wine, find out what it is, and ask one or two very quick questions. Then say thank you and step back away from the table so somebody else can get a taste. Depending on how quickly you are tasting, you should either stand clear of any tasting tables, or stand close but not so close that somebody else can't get in the queue. When you are ready to taste again, just repeat this process.

How to deal with the table monopolizers: stand behind them, stick out your tasting glass, and shout to be heard. The ones being rude will probably look back at you as if you are the rude one. Just smile and say, "Excuse me, I'm just trying to get a sample." When you get your sample, say "Thanks" and step away. Do this often enough, and they'll get the hint. If they don't, just elbow your way in and ignore them.

And you guys who are doing the pouring of the samples, you are just as guilty. What's the proper way? Look up and acknowledge anybody who is standing on the "second line" of tasters. Pour a taste over the heads or between the shoulders of people rude enough not to step back when they have received a taste. A good "pourer" will develop a little patter on each wine, and will be able to serve many people standing around the table, not just the ones right in front.

That's my biggest complaint about this type of event. What's yours?

Picnics, parks and wine

Today I attended an invitation-only picnic at a city-owned park. I was told when I accepted the invitation that alcoholic beverages are not allowed in the park. I was disappointed, but I went anyway. It's a beautiful day, the first full day of summer, and the weather is sunny and hot. A nice chilled rosé would have gone nicely with my hot dog and tomato and olive tapenade salad.

It's legal for adults to consume alcohol in this country. Why is it OK to ban alcohol in public parks? Why is this policy not challenged? There are already enough restrictions on when and where I can consume wine (see my previous post below about MADD). Do we really need another? There are laws against public drunkenness, against driving while impaired, and many other such laws; aren't they sufficient? Why can't I have a nice serving or two of wine when I'm at a picnic or a concert in the park?

I contend that there is no need for such laws and restrictions. If somebody consumes too much alcohol and is openly and noticeably drunk, then laws are in place whereby that person can and should be arrested. But let me enjoy some light and fruity Beaujolais with my curried chicken salad while I listen to some good live music in the park. I promise you won't even notice that I'm drinking wine...

MADD attempts to outlaw social drinking

This one has me seething mad! Mothers Against Drunk Drivers has come up with a diabolic way to prevent any adult in the US from enjoying a glass of wine in a bar, with dinner at a restaurant, or at a wine tasting or wine festival. This organization will not be satisfied until anyone who has consumed any alcohol can be arrested for "driving while impaired," aka "DUI" in many states. How do they plan to do this? By getting legislation passed to make Ignition Interlock Devices mandatory on all vehicles in the US, and by getting the maximum blood-alcohol concentration (BAC) set between .02 and .04 on these devices. This means that if you have a glass of wine at a restaurant with dinner, you willl not be able to drive home because the interlock will prevent your car from starting.

Towards this end MADD, through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), has launched a 5-year campaign for universal interlocks. "Contracting with the Automotive Coalition for Traffic Safety (ACTS), the agency has budgeted $10,000,000 to solicit research and development on the widespread use of in-vehicle technology to prevent alcohol-impaired driving."

Why am I mad about this? Because the facts just don't support the notion that "impaired" drivers are a danger. "Since 1997, the average BAC of a driver in a fatal crash has remained relatively stable at 0.18 percent—225 percent of the legal limit." And while MADD has succeeded in getting the legal limit for BAC reduced from .10 to .08, there is no evidence that the lower BAC rate has reduced fatality rates. In fact, "while drunk driving fatalities declined over the last 30 years, speeding and distracted driving deaths have steadily increased. And now negligent driving is the main cause of deaths on American highways."

MADD is no longer interested in traffic safety. The goal of this organization has become to make "impaired driving" illegal. I say that any organization that says it is interested in traffic safety should call for mandatory speed governors and technology to disable cell phones when a car is moving. Here are some other ways that drivers are distracted while driving: using a GPS navigation system, searching for stations on satellite radio, or programming an MP3 device. Why aren't these distractions being addressed? What about people who drive while sleep-deprived? And here's a radical idea: make automatic transmissions illegal. When you drive a car with a manual transmission, like I do, you have to concentrate on what you are doing, and you have to use both hands!

I'm so mad about this that I am seriously considering founding a counter-organization. I'll call it "DAMM"--Drunks Against Mad Mothers. Will you join it?