<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Beaujolais Nouveau 2005</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.wineweekly.com/wine-reviews/beaujolais-nouveau-2005/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.wineweekly.com/wine-reviews/beaujolais-nouveau-2005/</link>
	<description>Wine Reviews Tasting Notes and Education for the Non-Snob</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Jul 2010 21:08:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: vinojoe</title>
		<link>http://www.wineweekly.com/wine-reviews/beaujolais-nouveau-2005/comment-page-1/#comment-9</link>
		<dc:creator>vinojoe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2006 15:22:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wineweekly.com/?p=23#comment-9</guid>
		<description>Well Matt, I&#039;ll have to go ahead and uh, disagree with you on your opinion of Nouveau. And you&#039;ll have to retract your statement about a serious wine drinker who would touch it, because through this blog we&#039;ve kind of met, and I&#039;m a serious wine drinker who enjoys Nouveau!

On your tannins correction, I&#039;ll admit the gaffe and stand corrected. I guess what I was trying to say was that a wine made and bottled in less than a month isn&#039;t given the opportunity to spend time macerating with its skins, nor is it given any time to sit in a barrel --- the two chances it has to pick up tannins. After drinking nearly a bottle of Beaujolais while writing the post, I decided &quot;young&quot; was the correct term. How daft of me ... thank you for catching and correcting for the rest of the visitors !</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well Matt, I&#8217;ll have to go ahead and uh, disagree with you on your opinion of Nouveau. And you&#8217;ll have to retract your statement about a serious wine drinker who would touch it, because through this blog we&#8217;ve kind of met, and I&#8217;m a serious wine drinker who enjoys Nouveau!</p>
<p>On your <a rel="external" class="phpGiggle" title="get the definition" href="http://www.wineweekly.com/phpGiggle/?http://wineweekly.com/wine-term/index.php?id=55">tannin</a>s correction, I&#8217;ll admit the gaffe and stand corrected. I guess what I was trying to say was that a wine made and bottled in less than a month isn&#8217;t given the opportunity to spend time macerating with its skins, nor is it given any time to sit in a barrel &#8212; the two chances it has to pick up <a rel="external" class="phpGiggle" title="get the definition" href="http://www.wineweekly.com/phpGiggle/?http://wineweekly.com/wine-term/index.php?id=55">tannin</a>s. After drinking nearly a bottle of Beaujolais while writing the post, I decided &#8220;young&#8221; was the correct term. How daft of me &#8230; thank you for catching and correcting for the rest of the visitors !</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: matthk</title>
		<link>http://www.wineweekly.com/wine-reviews/beaujolais-nouveau-2005/comment-page-1/#comment-7</link>
		<dc:creator>matthk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2006 17:35:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wineweekly.com/?p=23#comment-7</guid>
		<description></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Come on Joe, Beaujolais Nouveau is generally awful muck, sought out by chumps who &#8220;think&#8221; it&#8217;s the cool thing to do. It&#8217;s rarely nice (or even fun) to drink and it doesn&#8217;t give the general wine buff an awful lot of a preview of what&#8217;s to come. In my opinion, it&#8217;s a way of getting a quick buck from fools. I&#8217;ve not met a serious wine drinker yet who would touch it. Sure, if I was in Beaujolais in November, I WOULD drink Beaujolais Nouveau, but only (as you mentioned) as a &#8216;celebration&#8217; of the year to come. But I would almost certainly hate it.</p>
<p>You also made an interesting statement:<br />
&#8220;&#8230;Because a wine this young shouldn’t have any <a rel="external" class="phpGiggle" title="get the definition" href="http://www.wineweekly.com/phpGiggle/?http://wineweekly.com/wine-term/index.php?id=55">tannin</a>s&#8230;&#8221;<br />
You must be giddy from guzzling too much Nouveau Joe, as we all know, wine doesn&#8217;t get it&#8217;s <a rel="external" class="phpGiggle" title="get the definition" href="http://www.wineweekly.com/phpGiggle/?http://wineweekly.com/wine-term/index.php?id=55">tannin</a>s with age, it gets them from the skin of the grape, and therefore, has all the <a rel="external" class="phpGiggle" title="get the definition" href="http://www.wineweekly.com/phpGiggle/?http://wineweekly.com/wine-term/index.php?id=55">tannin</a>s it&#8217;s EVER going to have, right there in the bottle from day one. Sure, <a rel="external" class="phpGiggle" title="get the definition" href="http://www.wineweekly.com/phpGiggle/?http://wineweekly.com/wine-term/index.php?id=55">tannin</a>s &#8216;develop&#8217; but to say a young wine shouldn&#8217;t have <a rel="external" class="phpGiggle" title="get the definition" href="http://www.wineweekly.com/phpGiggle/?http://wineweekly.com/wine-term/index.php?id=55">tannin</a>s is, well a bit daft.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
