A Tappit Hen glass…an interesting idea!JacobH wrote: ↑11:08 Wed 07 Jul 2021It seems to me that Riedel is missing a trick. Not only could they market glasses specially designed for every grape variety under the sun, they could also offer a bespoke range where the glass is then scaled to 𝑥 × your personal mouthful size, so you never have an unsatisfying small amount left in the glass when you finish. Perhaps I should patent this idea and see if I can flog it to them?winesecretary wrote: ↑00:21 Wed 07 Jul 2021 There is a more fundamental measure, which is highly personal. What is, for you, a decent mouthful? How many decent mouthfuls do you want of one wine? That is the perfect size of bottle, if drinking alone.
Port myths and their truth
Re: Port myths and their truth
- uncle tom
- Dalva Golden White Colheita 1952
- Posts: 3522
- Joined: 23:43 Wed 20 Jun 2007
- Location: Near Saffron Walden, England
Re: Port myths and their truth
And now that the Tappit Hen has been redefined as a tregnum, it is worth noting that a Quart is almost exactly half that size. So anyone allergic to the notion of imperial quarts and pints can call them Half Tappits or Quarter Tappits instead..A Tappit Hen glass…an interesting idea!
I may be drunk, Miss, but in the morning I shall be sober and you will still be ugly - W.S. Churchill
Re: Port myths and their truth
Only for you. If I were to buy your arguments, which I don't, then for me the reversion that makes the most sense is to American measures. The larger British sizes (and smaller ounce) make no sense to 330 million of us over here.
The rest of your arguments are largely pedantry. Yes, yes, base 60 would actually be the best counting system, but no one uses it as a general counting system anymore so it's a moot argument. Base 2 works for computers but is unwieldy for humans. I mean, who wants a 1011101110 ml bottle?
The crux of the issue is really Julian's point - what's the base unit? You argue for Imperial units (which is what, the ounce? pint? quart? gallon?) while I argue for the liter. Then if you really want to use multiples of 2, you have half and quarter liters, or 2L, 4L, etc.
Most of your argument sounds like NIHEIIIF. Not Invented Here, Especially If Invented In France. Understandable for someone from the UK, but that doesn't make it logical.
Glenn Elliott
Re: Port myths and their truth
The score is one-all. The French thoroughly won the battle of the numbers (the universe itself is measured in m³ kg⁻¹ s⁻²) but we thoroughly won the battle of the words (English is the new Latin).
Re: Port myths and their truth
Generally speaking, that seems like it favors England over France to me. The French weren't smart enough to name their numbering system The Francic System, after all.
Glenn Elliott
- Delinquent
- Cockburn’s Special Reserve
- Posts: 39
- Joined: 20:10 Wed 22 Jul 2020
- Location: Bern, Switzerland
- Contact: