The "3-day" Test

My favorite local wine merchant has suggested to me a test that he claims will help evaluate the cellar-ability of red wines. Here is his methodology:
- Open a bottle tonight and taste it.
- Taste it again tomorrow night. Is it better or falling apart?
- Taste it again the third night. Better or falling apart?

He says that if it's falling apart the second night, it should not be aged but consumed now.
If it's better the second night, it will improve in the cellar for 1 to 1.5 years.
If it's better the third night, it will improve in the cellar for 5 years.

He sold me a single bottle of a very inexpensive French Bourdeaux (Chateau Buisson-Redon 2006) for $9.99 a bottle ($7.50 a bottle case of 12). The first night it was pretty raunchy with bitter tannins; my wife wouldn't even drink it. Second night it was coming together better, but still kind of raunchy. The third night (tonight) it's drinking pretty well, much better integrated with much of the tannins resolved. I'm considering buying a case and sitting on it.

Has anyone else heard of this testing methodology? Is it valid?

Thanks,
Marc

If you leave it overnight, do you put the cork back in or not?

The third night (tonight) it's drinking pretty well, much better integrated with much of the tannins resolved. I'm considering buying a case and sitting on it.

Sure the tannins were resolved, but what about the fruit depth or the precision of the flavors?

Personally, I'd be skeptical about aging a case of $10 per bottle Bordeaux that was downright 'raunchy' for 2 days. But, I haven't tasted this particular wine.

If you leave it overnight, do you put the cork back in or not?

Yes, I put the cork back in.

The third night (tonight) it's drinking pretty well, much better integrated with much of the tannins resolved. I'm considering buying a case and sitting on it.

Sure the tannins were resolved, but what about the fruit depth or the precision of the flavors?

Personally, I'd be skeptical about aging a case of $10 per bottle Bordeaux that was downright 'raunchy' for 2 days. But, I haven't tasted this particular wine.

I'm not far enough along in training my palate to address the "fruit depth or the precision of the flavors". But, on the third night, it tasted better than a $10.00 (or $ 7.50 case price) wine to me. I'm just now starting to play with French wines and am not sure I understand the parameters. So, I'm learning.

My experience is with big reds from California (zin and petite sirah), but a couple of knowledgable Frenchmen have recently told me that those are too "big and burly" and that real wine enjoyment comes from more subtle wines focused on food pairing. OK, I'll try anything.

I'd be really curious to hear an evaluation of this particular wine from a more sophisticated set of taste buds.

Marc

With regard to the "3-day Test", I have a rather technical term to sum that up and that term is "nonsense". When a wine remains open for 1 day, 2 days or 3 days it does not develop - it simply oxidizes and that gives no clue whatsoever to its potential aging ability.

Granted, not everyone will finish a bottle of wine on the day that it is opened, and granted a bit of oxidation may even have a positive effect on the wine, but that says nothing at all about cellaring potential. I'll even go a bit further - indeed some wines will taste better on the second day but the vast majority of wines will not. Also true that from time to time we hear about someone who sipped from a bottle three months after it had been opened and found it wonderful. Pure and unadulterated coincidence.

And even further - no dry red or white wine should be held responsible for whatever may happen to it one, two or three days after opening. As I have said before on many occasions, should ever I become president, prime minister, king or emperor of any place on earth, the first law that I will pass is to the effect that wine bottles must be finished on the day they are opened. Punishment will be reduced considerably for those who have no choice but they had best have a darned good excuse!

Best
Rogov

Also true that from time to time we hear about someone who sipped from a bottle three months after it had been opened and found it wonderful. Pure and unadulterated coincidence.

I don't know what you mean by coincidence? The types of wines that have this happen to them are usually pretty consistent, such as sweet wines, oxidized Jura wines, riesling...

I'm not far enough along in training my palate to address the "fruit depth or the precision of the flavors". But, on the third night, it tasted better than a $10.00 (or $ 7.50 case price) wine to me...I'd be really curious to hear an evaluation of this particular wine from a more sophisticated set of taste buds...

It's hard to know without actually tasting the wine but if it was too tannic in the beginning then of course that will be solved by exposing it to air. The big question is whether the fruit held up because more often than not after 2 days of air the wine will tilt towards sour and vague flavors. So in some respects it may seem like a better wine because it is easier to drink, especially with food, but that still doesn't mean it is particially special or interesting to drink on its own merits. You may or may not be able to tell that right now.

I would suspect that if you bought a case and aged it for 5-10 years your palate would have evolved by that time to a point where you would no longer appreciate this wine. Especially since you describe it on the first two days as 'raunchy', which leads me to believe it's just not a very good wine, even if it became drinkable on the third day. (It would be a different story if you described it as intense, flavorful, whatever, but just a touch too tannic until day 3).

But, since it was your wine expert friend who sold you the bottle, what does he think?

[David M. Bueker]

The consistency of Riesling improving on the second or third day is a complete myth IMO. Sure some have sucha blanket of protective sulfur that they need air to blow that off, but decanting is far more effective, and finishing the wine sooner is better. The vast majortiy of Rieslings (even the very young) lose much of their vigor after 24 hours open, losing the grip that I crave so much.

my view is quite contrary to Rogov's. i find that for white and rose wines, they are nearly uniformly better the second day - esp if they are recent vintages. my method is to drink half or so and refrigerate the rest - WITHOUT CLOSURE. nearly always the wine has more fruit and fewer off odors the second day. this was not the case when in the past i would put a cork or other closure on the bottle. i have theories about this phenomenon relating to sulfur compounds; but these could easily be wrong.

The 3-day test seems awfully subjective, and unlikely to correlate directly with aging potential, in my opinion. I've had 15 year old wines that have improved in the 48+ hours after opening.

they are nearly uniformly better the second day - esp if they are recent vintages. my method is to drink half or so and refrigerate the rest - WITHOUT CLOSURE. nearly always the wine has more fruit and fewer off odors the second day..

Something about this doesn't sound right.

If you mean that white and rose wines with off odors on the first day taste better on the second day, then I can sort of see that. At least to the extent that they start to fall apart so the off odors disappear along with whatever was good about the wine, but leading to a final package that is less offensive.

But my second question is why most of your wines have off odors on the first day? That sounds weird.

The consistency of Riesling improving on the second or third day is a complete myth IMO..

By 'consistent' I didn't mean that riesling is consistently better on the second or third day. I agree with you that most should be drunk the first day. I meant that among wines that are better on the second or third day, or that hold up for several months, there is usually a consistently small core of grapes/styles that work. So you rarely hear about a white Burgundy or a California merlot being opened for 3 months and still tasting good. But you will hear that about a German TBA or a Vin Jaune.

Rahsaan, Hi.....

We are not at all in disagreement about sweet wines. That was why I specifically mentioned dry red and white wines in my original post on this thread. Many sweet wines will hold nicely in open bottles for quite a while. Here too, however, I suggest that there is no connection/correlation to true aging potential.

Best
Rogov

The 3 day test

If you taste some on night 1, some again on night 2 and once more on night 3, then it's clearly not a great wine, otherwise it wouldn't have made it unfinished past night 1

Seriously though, I think it's a reference point and possible indicator, but far too clumsy an approach to use with any confidence.

For me longevity is ideally judged by (in broad order of importance)
- What's the cellaring history of previous vintages? Does it typically last and improve over 2 decades or peak at 4-5 years
- What effect has vintage / winemaking changes made to the wine? Is it riper than normal, hence potentially a bit showy in youth? Is the balance good? How are similar wines developing? (is this generally an early maturing vintage or a sleeper?)

Essentially (for those of a Statistics background) a Bayesian approach, that starts with a hypothesis of typical longevity, then uses actual experience tasting the specific wine to refine the prediction.

Of course this is less useful for a brand new wine or radical change in style - but then the Sierra Carche debacle reported elsewhere shows the folly of being stridently confident about cellaring prospects of a wine with no track record. For such new labels I'd be very happy if critics would forego the usual drinking window dates, using instead a more cagey verbal scale (e.g. Drink in short term, potential short-medium term cellaring potential, has long-term potential for the cellar - but let's revisit it in 5 years to gauge progress).

regards

Ian

...For such new labels I'd be very happy if critics would forego the usual drinking window dates, using instead a more cagey verbal scale (e.g. Drink in short term, potential short-medium term cellaring potential, has long-term potential for the cellar - but let's revisit it in 5 years to gauge progress).

Ian, Hi...

Indeed track record is critically important in predicting drinking windows. With wines that have an obvious short term cellaring potential, prediction is simple enough, even with an unknown winery. With such wineries that have a wine that seems to have aging potential, however, it is far more difficult to be accurate. For that reason I will sometimes close my tasting note with something to the effect of "Drink from release...." or "Best starting ..." but with no closing or predicted date. At times, I will even publish my "note to myself" - try again in four years"

Best
Rogov

Seriously though, I think it's a reference point and possible indicator, but far too clumsy an approach to use with any confidence.

For me longevity is ideally judged by (in broad order of importance)
- What's the cellaring history of previous vintages? Does it typically last and improve over 2 decades or peak at 4-5 years
- What effect has vintage / winemaking changes made to the wine? Is it riper than normal, hence potentially a bit showy in youth? Is the balance good? How are similar wines developing? (is this generally an early maturing vintage or a sleeper?)

Pretty much sums up my opinion- how a wine does open is a minor data point.

The 3 day test

If you taste some on night 1, some again on night 2 and once more on night 3, then it's clearly not a great wine, otherwise it wouldn't have made it unfinished past night 1

I have proven this more times than are probably good for me!

But back to Marc's original dilemma, should he buy a case of this? I say forget it. Why buy a case of wine your wife doesn't like at all, and you feel no real enthusiasm for, hoping that in 5 years or so it will turn from a frog into a prince? There are lots of relatively cheap Bordeaux out there, and tons of decent $10-$15 French wines to taste. Buy a couple of bottles to age if you want and move on. Have your friend put together a mixed case of French wines to try. Then go to another good store and do the same thing. Go for a wide variety of grapes and regions. At least you won't have to wait 5 years or more to see if they're any good. Avoid aging anything with a plastic cork. And make sure you have the proper storage conditions to age wines. It needn't be fancy, but it's got to be cool. Below 65˚.

they are nearly uniformly better the second day - esp if they are recent vintages. my method is to drink half or so and refrigerate the rest - WITHOUT CLOSURE. nearly always the wine has more fruit and fewer off odors the second day..

Something about this doesn't sound right.

If you mean that white and rose wines with off odors on the first day taste better on the second day, then I can sort of see that. At least to the extent that they start to fall apart so the off odors disappear along with whatever was good about the wine, but leading to a final package that is less offensive.

But my second question is why most of your wines have off odors on the first day? That sounds weird.

COULD be that David is very sensitive to SO2 (just like some people can detect impossibly low levels of TCA). Then it would make sense that he would find many whites and rose wines to have "off" odors on the first day and be better after the SO2 blows off.

Personally I can't think of an example of a dry white or rose that's been better for me the second day, but the good stuff never makes it to the second day around here

Regards,

John

Sorry that I am bringing this thread back to life, but I was doing some “research” and going through an older wine encyclopedia book that I have (Alexis Lichine’s). I think there might be some confusion here. Never heard of the “3-Day Rule” and like Daniel thought it was basically a bunch of “nonsense”.
Now re-reading Lichine’s book I did find reference to something that he referred to as the “3-Bottle Rule”. (I’m pretty sure quite a few of us here are familiar with this rule). Basically you buy 3 bottles of a wine, drink one “immediately” write down your impressions and record them. Six months later drink the second bottle, and again write down your impressions and record them (without looking back on the first wine’s notes). Six months after drinking the second bottle drink the last bottle and again write down your impressions and then compare all three tasting notes. Then try to decide or “gauge” if this wine has aging potential or if you” liked” or “disliked” how the wine is “evolving”.

Salute

Victor, Hi....

Few would disagree with Lichine's test but that's a completely different "game" than letting the same bottle sit for 1, 2 or 3 days and retasting. The concept of re-tasting a wine deemed to have potential every six months is indeed an excellent one, often giving vital clues as to cellaring potential.

Best
Rogov

One of the problems with the 3 bottle rule is that after drinking the 3rd and deciding the wine has aging potential, you may not be able to find anymore of the wine as it's all sold.

Yes that could be a problem Doug. But being on the east coast so close to NYC and having several nice size fine wine shops I consider myself lucky. Over the years developing a great relationship with these merchants, they are all willing to do the “leg” work for me. However they hunt it down (importers, distributors, private cellars, collectors, other contacts, etc) they most of the time find it.

Salute