Actually, Chris, I did have a really good time. The components of the experience need to be weighted, with the beer floor being the heaviest. Yeah, the salon was a rough pick, and then... the food... but it was still a blast.

Got the JW like 2 years ago at Half Time in my hometown, Poughkeepsie NY. Check 'em out on Beer Advocate; seriously, one of the biggest beer stores I have ever seen. Always hope to find something interesting when I go visit the parents.

Last time I visited, Kevin, it was on a Sunday, and he was parked at the Barton Street location. When I asked when he worked, Jesus did say everyday, so you should be able to find him at one location or the other on weekends. Good luck, and I hope you enjoy!

Ummm... NO! I totally did that on purpose! For, like, irony... yeah. Ack, how embarrassing. Now fixed. Thanks Arnold, and sorry to any Worcesterianites out there.

Wow, hello Mr. Molesworth! Thank you for reading and participating; wouldn't have expected to be on your radar. Again, thank you, but I fear you may have misunderstood me, and I thought I might take a moment to more thoroughly explain my position. I totally appreciate the idea of a wine's shelf life -- of COURSE wines change, and that is the fun of it. And knowing when a wine is expected to 'peak' is one of the most important things the consumer can know. I applaud you and your contemporaries for providing that info, and thank you as well for your thorough and consistently helpful tasting notes. While I was being facetious when I called your magazine a 'rag,' as it is obviously well regarded, I was not being so when I asked rhetorically about the declination of score over time. When one embarks to score wines on a precise 50 point scale, I would think that he would consider that a wine might change enough in character to merit a shift of a point or two after a mere couple of months, and maybe even more over several years. When the difference between an 89 and a 90 can mean all the difference to a certain set of consumers, is this not a valid concern? When you say that you rate a wine based on "its peak," and give a four year range in your notes, are we to understand that that wine will remain unchanged throughout that period? I was not saying that having an 'expiration date' muddies the water of the score, but visa-versa. Whereas having a critic's educated opinion as to when a wine will start to decline is great, I feel that the 100 pt system confuses the matter. Assigning such a specific, concrete number to a product that is in constant flux just strikes me as ludicrous, and more than a little counterproductive to the practice of choosing the proper wine for an occasion. With tasting notes, it is easy to take into consideration the workings of time, and often certain characteristics will remain after years in bottle -- notes are a record of impressions, and their fluidity is accepted as writ. When it comes to scores, the mind (particularly the stat-happy American mind) is not trained that way: Scores are solid, stable, and generally accepted as more important than words. Whereas those traits are well-deserved and accurate in many fields, they simply do not translate to a discussion of wine, which unfortunately leads to misunderstanding, and sometimes, abuse. But I am sure you hear from cranks like me all the time, so I will not bother you further. Thank you again for the vital service you provide. I hope that I have cleared up any misunderstanding on your part, and beg your pardon if I have caused any further offense. Rob

Oooo... one dissenter already. Fair enough! Anyone else?