XLVI Feria del Vino y Fiesta de la Vendimia de Cigales: programa 2026

Fiesta de Interés Turístico Regional

XLVI Feria del Vino y Fiesta de la Vendimia de Cigales

Programa completo · del 21 al 27 de septiembre de 2026

Cigales (Valladolid) vuelve a convertirse, un año más, en la capital castellana del vino. Siete días de catas, folklore, artesanía, gastronomía y música con la Denominación de Origen Cigales como gran protagonista, y el fin de semana del 26 y 27 de septiembre como gran colofón, con el tradicional pisado de la uva, la Feria del Vino y el Encuentro de Folklore.

Organiza el Ayuntamiento de Cigales, con la colaboración de la Junta de Castilla y León, la Diputación de Valladolid, el Consejo Regulador de la D.O. Cigales, la Ruta del Vino Cigales y las asociaciones Vacceos, Las Torres de Cigales y AJA El Barrero.

🔎 Filtra el programa

Día

Todos Lun 21 Mar 22 Mié 23 Jue 24 Vie 25 Sáb 26 Dom 27

Tipo de actividad

Todos 🍷 Cata 🎵 Concierto 🎨 Taller 🐂 Taurino 💃 Folklore 🎗️ Institucional 🧒 Infantil 🍢 Gastronomía ⛪ Religioso 🎉 Fiesta 🖼️ Exposición

Lugar

Todos Plaza Mayor Pza. Lagunajo Parque Municipal T. Clandestino Entorno Iglesia Otros lugares

0 actividades encontradas

20:00 h

Lun 21Cata

Aprende Catando: menos teoría y más copa

Cata dirigida a público joven, con Arturo González Caballero (Bodegas Mucy) y el DJ local Mario MMM. 2 €, incluye catavino. Inscripción previa.

📍 Parque Municipal

12:00 h

Mar 22Exposición

25 aniversario de la Red Rural

Exposición conmemorativa en apoyo a las personas con discapacidad de la provincia de Valladolid.

📍 Biblioteca Municipal

20:00 h

Mar 22Cata

Cata Maridaje de Queso y Vino

Con el maestro quesero Armando Sanz y Sergio García Ferrero (Ruta del Vino Cigales). 2 €, incluye catavino. Inscripción previa.

📍 Parque Municipal

19:00 h

Mié 23Cata

Gran Gincata

Concurso por parejas con cata de vinos de Cigales, con el Club de Cata de Cigales (ACACI). 2 €. Inscripción previa.

📍 Parque Municipal

13:30 h

Jue 24Institucional

Placa del Paseo del Vino

Inauguración de la placa dedicada a Bodega Ovidio García.

📍 Arcos de la Iglesia

18:00 h

Jue 24Infantil

Campeonato de Juegos Autóctonos

Tanga, bolos y la rana, para niños y niñas de 6 a 12 años, con AJA El Barrero. Sin inscripción previa.

📍 Plaza Mayor

20:00 h

Jue 24Cata

Cata-Casino

«Casino Cigaleño del Vino», con crupieres y sumilleres. Colaboran la Ruta del Vino Cigales y el Consejo Regulador. Inscripción previa.

📍 Parque Municipal

19:00 h

Vie 25Gastronomía

Apertura de la Feria de Día

Puestos y ambiente gastronómico para abrir la tarde.

📍 Plaza Mayor

19:30 h

Vie 25Cata

Cata comentada

Por Jesús María Barrigón Centeno (director técnico del C.R.D.O.), con enólogos de las bodegas participantes. Inscripción previa.

📍 Plaza Mayor

21:30 h

Vie 25Concierto

Actuación del grupo Casanova

Concierto en directo para abrir la noche del viernes.

📍 Plaza Mayor

22:00 h

Vie 25Concierto

Concierto en la Terraza del Clandestino

Organizado por Las Barricas & Clandestino.

📍 Terraza del Clandestino

23:00–04:00 h

Vie 25Fiesta

Discomovida

Con Joel Marashi, Víctor González y los DJ's locales GZLOK, BSB y Raúl MD.

📍 Plaza Mayor

11:00 h

Sáb 26Artesanía

Apertura de la XXVII Muestra de Oficios Tradicionales

Oficios y artesanos tradicionales de Cigales y la comarca.

📍 Entorno de la Iglesia

11:30–14:00 h

Sáb 26Taller

Talleres de artesanía

Alfarería, velas, cantería y joyería.

📍 Entorno de la Iglesia

12:00 h

Sáb 26Taurino

Paseo de Chiquibueyes

Recorrido tradicional por el centro del pueblo.

📍 Calle Armas

12:00 h

Sáb 26Gastronomía

Apertura de la Feria de Día

Puestos y ambiente gastronómico durante todo el día.

📍 Plaza Mayor

13:00 h

Sáb 26Infantil

Gran Gincana Infantil de la Vendimia

Plazas limitadas. Inscripción desde el 15 de septiembre en la Oficina de Cultura (Plaza Mayor 8, tel. 639 04 48 75).

📍 Parque Infantil

13:30 h

Sáb 26Concierto

Charanga Los Tocaos

Pasacalles musical y animación por las calles del centro.

📍 Plaza Mayor

16:00 h

Sáb 26Concierto

Concierto de Sergio Lucas

Flamenco y ritmo latino.

📍 Terraza del Clandestino

17:45 h

Sáb 26Institucional

Recepción de autoridades y bodegueros

Acto protocolario previo al pregón.

📍 Ayuntamiento

18:00 h

Sáb 26Religioso

Misa castellana

Oficiada por José Alfredo Lanchero, amenizada por el Coro de Cigales.

📍 Iglesia Parroquial de Santiago Apóstol

18:00 h

Sáb 26Gastronomía

Venta del bocadillo típico

Morcilla, chorizo, salchicha o lomo, por la Carnicería La Maruja.

📍 Plaza Mayor

18:45 h

Sáb 26Desfile

Pasacalles de bodegueros y grupos de folklore

Con autoridades y asociaciones culturales locales.

📍 Desde la Casa de Cultura Vacceos

19:00 h

Sáb 26Institucional

Imposición de bandas y proclamación de la bodeguera mayor

Acto central de reconocimiento a las bodegueras.

📍 Plaza del Lagunajo

19:30 h

Sáb 26Institucional

Pregón de la XLVI Feria del Vino y Fiesta de la Vendimia

A cargo de Águeda del Val Ubierna, por toda una vida dedicada al vino y a la D.O. Cigales.

📍 Plaza del Lagunajo

19:30–22:00 h

Sáb 26Cata

Feria del Vino

Degustación de la D.O. Cigales: Bodega Cooperativa de Cigales, Frutos Villar, Finca Museum, Ovidio García, Bodegas Thesaurus y Vinos de la Luz, más la bodega invitada César Príncipe (Fuensaldaña). Catavino: 2 €, hasta fin de existencias.

📍 Plaza del Lagunajo

19:45 h

Sáb 26Premios

Embajador de la D.O. y Concurso Fotográfico del Envero

Distinción de Embajador de la D.O. Cigales 2026 para Jaime Fernández, y entrega de los premios del VII Concurso Fotográfico del Envero.

📍 Plaza del Lagunajo

20:00 h

Sáb 26Folklore

XLV Encuentro de Folklore

Asociación Cultural Vacceos, Asociación Cultural Las Torres de Cigales, Grupo Folklórico Aires Castellanos (Arroyo de la Encomienda) y Grupo de Jotas La Corbata (Baltanás, Palencia).

📍 Plaza del Lagunajo

22:00 h

Sáb 26Concierto

Concierto de Los Subterráneos

Blues y rock and roll en español, con influencias de Extremoduro, Rolling Stones y Platero y Tú, entre otros.

📍 Plaza Mayor

22:00 h

Sáb 26Concierto

Concierto de Los Pichas

Música en directo en la terraza.

📍 Terraza del Clandestino

23:30–04:00 h

Sáb 26Fiesta

Macrodiscomovida Electromoon

Cierre de la noche del sábado con música electrónica.

📍 Plaza Mayor y Terraza del Clandestino

Sáb-Dom

Sáb 26–Dom 27Gastronomía

XV Jornadas Gastronómicas del Pincho Uvero

Siete establecimientos —El Arco Bocatería, Las Barricas, Bar Menfis, El Moral Cafetería, Bar Social y Bar Zocha, entre otros— ofrecen su pincho uvero a 3 €, con vino o cerveza.

📍 Bares del centro de Cigales

10:30 h

Dom 27Taurino

Encierro campero

Abre la jornada del domingo.

📍 Recorrido urbano

10:30–14:00 h

Dom 27Taller

Talleres de Foacal

«Dem de Lienzo» (Luisa Guardo) y «Arte Chema» (José María Martín García).

📍 Parque Municipal

11:00 h

Dom 27Artesanía

Apertura de la Muestra de Oficios

Segunda jornada de la muestra de oficios tradicionales.

📍 Entorno de la Iglesia

11:30–14:00 h

Dom 27Taller

Talleres de artesanía

Pintura textil, jabones y alfarería.

📍 Entorno de la Iglesia

12:00 h

Dom 27Gastronomía

Apertura de la Feria de Día

Último día de puestos y ambiente gastronómico.

📍 Plaza Mayor

12:30 h

Dom 27Cata

Feria del Vino

Degustación de vino y queso hasta fin de existencias. 2 €.

📍 Parque Municipal

12:30 h

Dom 27Concierto

Concierto de la Banda Sinfónica de Cigales

Actuación de la banda local.

📍 Parque Municipal

13:30 h

Dom 27Concierto

Concierto didáctico de Farroyo

Guitarras y canciones, en formato didáctico.

📍 Plaza Mayor

15:00 h

Dom 27Concierto

El Sarao de los Flamenkitos

Sesión en directo por la tarde.

📍 Terraza del Clandestino

17:00 h

Dom 27Música

Sesión de Dani del Lío

Música en directo en la terraza.

📍 Terraza del Clandestino

17:00–20:30 h

Dom 27Taller

Talleres de Foacal

«Donde la lana sueña» (Raquel Puertas) y grabado con Luis Javier Esteban.

📍 Parque Municipal

19:00 h

Dom 27Taurino

IX Toro del Clarete

Seguido de la suelta de dos vacas. Uno de los actos más esperados de la fiesta.

📍 Calle Las Armas

20:30 h

Dom 27Concierto

Concierto de Abby y Miguel

Cierre musical en la plaza principal.

📍 Plaza Mayor

21:30 h

Dom 27Música

Sesión de DJ Apulse

Cierre de la XLVI Feria del Vino y Fiesta de la Vendimia.

📍 Terraza del Clandestino

No hay actividades que coincidan con estos filtros. Prueba a cambiar alguno.

ℹ️ Información práctica

• Catas: todas cuestan 2 € e incluyen catavino. Solo para mayores de 18 años. Conviene llegar 10 minutos antes con el ticket.
• Escenarios principales: Plaza Mayor, Plaza del Lagunajo, Parque Municipal y entorno de la Iglesia Parroquial de Santiago Apóstol.
• Reconocimiento: declarada Fiesta de Interés Turístico Regional, una de las más antiguas de Castilla y León.

Detalle del programa oficial · Ayuntamiento de Cigales

Programa sujeto a posibles cambios de última hora por parte de la organización.

Autobús Valladolid a Zamora

Valladolid a Zamora

Zamora a Valladolid 

The Other Side of AI

How AI-Generated Text Can Be Detected

Since ChatGPT's public release in late 2022, a parallel industry has grown around a single question: can software tell whether a piece of text was written by a human or a machine? Universities, publishers, and now blog platforms increasingly run submissions through "AI detectors" before accepting them. But how do these tools actually work, how accurate are they in 2026, and what do official research and publishing bodies say about relying on them? This article walks through the mechanics, the evidence, and the practical reality.

How AI detectors actually work

Most AI text detectors do not "recognize" a specific model the way a fingerprint scanner recognizes a finger. Instead, they analyze statistical patterns in language:

• Perplexity — a measure of how predictable each word choice is, given everything before it. Large language models tend to choose highly probable next words, which produces low-perplexity, "smooth" text. Human writing is often less predictable.
• Burstiness — the variation in sentence length and structure across a passage. Human writing tends to alternate between short and long sentences organically; AI output has historically been more uniform in pacing and rhythm.
• Watermarking and model-side signals — some newer approaches rely on statistical watermarks embedded by the model provider itself, or on classifiers trained to recognize a specific model family's output patterns.

Detectors such as Turnitin's AI Writing Indicator, GPTZero, Originality.ai, Copyleaks, and Pangram build on these signals, usually combined with machine-learning classifiers trained on large datasets of known human and AI text.

How accurate are these tools, really?

This is where the picture gets complicated. Independent academic evaluations published through 2026 consistently find that detector accuracy is far from the near-perfect numbers vendors advertise.

A 2026 study in the International Journal for Educational Integrity comparing Originality and Turnitin found that Originality outperformed Turnitin on overall accuracy (0.69 vs. 0.61) and recall (0.60 vs. 0.51) — but both tools performed poorly on "hybrid" text, meaning writing that mixes human editing with AI-generated passages, which is increasingly how AI-assisted writing actually looks in practice.^[2]

A separate 2026 systematic evaluation published on ScienceDirect concluded that current AI-generated-content (AIGC) detection tools "are not yet sufficiently robust or reliable for high-stakes academic decision-making," despite rapid improvements in the underlying detection algorithms.^[3]

A peer-reviewed evaluation in a medical education journal (PMC) testing detectors and human reviewers side by side found that while detection tools could "meaningfully distinguish plausible AI-use conditions," reliability varied significantly between tools, and human scoring accuracy was uniformly low — reinforcing that people are generally worse at spotting AI text than the software is.^[4]

The false-positive problem

Perhaps the most important finding for anyone publishing legitimate human-written content is the rate of false positives — human writing incorrectly flagged as AI-generated.

An earlier but widely cited 2023 evaluation by Weber-Wulff and colleagues, testing 14 detection systems, found that none of the tools reliably confirmed the accuracy claims made by their developers.^[5] A related study published in Patterns found that a large majority of TOEFL essays written by non-native English speakers were incorrectly flagged as AI-generated by at least one of several detectors — because formal, careful, less idiomatic writing statistically resembles AI output, even when a human wrote every word.

This matters directly for blog and journal content: polished, well-structured, formal writing — exactly what most publications ask for — is the style most likely to trigger a false positive, regardless of who actually wrote it.

What official publishing bodies actually require

Detection tools are only half the story. The other half is policy — what journals, publishers, and editorial bodies actually require from authors. As of 2026 there is a stable, cross-industry consensus:

• No AI tool can be listed as an author. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) states that AI tools cannot take responsibility for a work's accuracy or give final approval for publication — both required conditions for authorship — so they cannot be credited as authors, however much they contributed to drafting.^[1]
• Disclosure is required, not detection. The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) requires that authors using AI tools to draft text, generate images, or process data be transparent about it, typically in the methods or acknowledgements section, naming the tool and describing how it was used.^[6]
• Human authors remain fully accountable. Both ICMJE and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) are explicit that authors are responsible for the accuracy of anything an AI tool contributed, including checking for fabricated citations or incorrect claims — a well-documented failure mode of generative AI.^[7]

In other words, the publishing world's actual safeguard against undisclosed AI use isn't a detector score — it's a disclosure requirement, backed by the much simpler fact that authors are liable for what they submit, detected or not.

Comparing the major detection tools

Tool	Primary signal	Reported strength	Known limitation
Turnitin AI Writing Indicator	Perplexity/burstiness classifier	Widely deployed in higher education	Independent accuracy estimates trail vendor claims; struggles with edited text
GPTZero	Perplexity/burstiness classifier	Fast, widely used browser-based check	Sensitive to formal, non-native, or heavily edited writing
Originality.ai	Classifier + paraphrase-resistance layer	Outperformed Turnitin in 2026 academic testing	Still weak on hybrid human/AI text
Copyleaks / Pangram	Classifier + similarity/plagiarism check	Combines AI detection with originality checking	Accuracy varies by content genre and length

Practical takeaways for writers and bloggers

1. Don't treat a detector score as proof of anything. Every major independent study through 2026 warns against using a single detector result as evidence, in either direction.
2. Disclosure beats evasion. If you use an AI tool to help draft or organize content, a short, honest disclosure line is both the accepted best practice and far more defensible than hoping a detector never flags the piece.
3. Editing matters more than tools realize. Heavily revised, fact-checked, human-edited AI-assisted drafts are exactly the "hybrid" text that current detectors handle worst — which cuts both ways: it can evade detection, but it can also mean genuine human work gets wrongly flagged.
4. Accuracy and sourcing are the real risk, not detection. The bigger practical danger of AI-assisted writing is factual error or fabricated citations, not getting caught by a classifier. Verify everything an AI tool contributes before publishing it.

The bottom line

AI text detectors exist, they are improving, and some (like Originality.ai in recent testing) perform meaningfully better than others. But 2026 research is consistent on one point: none of them are reliable enough to serve as definitive proof that a piece of writing was or wasn't AI-generated, especially once a human has edited the draft. The publishing world has responded not by chasing better detectors, but by shifting the burden to disclosure and author accountability — a framework that works regardless of how good detection technology eventually becomes.

Sources

1. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals, Section V: Use of Artificial Intelligence in Publishing. icmje.org
2. Hadra, M., Cambridge, K., Mesbah, M. (2026). Evaluating the accuracy and reliability of AI content detectors in academic contexts. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 22(4). link.springer.com
3. Trusting AI to detect AI? A systematic evaluation of the reliability and robustness of current AIGC detection tools for student academic work (2026). ScienceDirect. sciencedirect.com
4. Ability of AI detection tools and humans to accurately identify different forms of AI-generated written content. PMC. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
5. Weber-Wulff, D. et al. (2023). Testing of detection tools for AI-generated text. Summarized in: How Reliable Are AI Detectors For Academic Text? effortlessacademic.com
6. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Authorship and AI tools — COPE position statement (13 February 2023). publicationethics.org
7. World Association of Medical Editors (WAME). Recommendations on Chatbots and Generative Artificial Intelligence in Relation to Scholarly Publication. wame.org

Why Blogging Still Matters In The Age Of AI

Type a question into an AI chat tool today and you get a clean confident answer in three seconds. No scrolling past ads, no reading five hundred words of introduction before the actual recipe or the actual fix appears. It feels like the search box has been replaced by something faster and smarter, and it raises an honest question for anyone thinking about starting a blog in 2026. If a machine can summarize the internet on command, why would anyone spend hours writing a post that a chatbot might just swallow and repackage in a paragraph?

It is a fair worry, and the numbers back it up more than most people expect. But the numbers also tell a second story that rarely gets attention, one about why original writing is becoming more valuable, not less, even as it becomes less visible.

The traffic numbers are real

The Pew Research Center tracked the browsing activity of nine hundred American adults across roughly sixty nine thousand Google searches in March 2025. Their finding was direct. When an AI generated summary appeared at the top of the results page, people clicked through to a website only eight percent of the time. Without that summary, the click rate was fifteen percent, almost double. Clicking a link placed inside the AI summary itself happened in just one percent of visits. People were also more likely to end their search session entirely once the summary answered their question, rather than continue reading elsewhere.

Ahrefs reached a similar conclusion from a different angle. Their analysis of three hundred thousand keywords found that the top ranking page for a search term lost more than a third of its usual click through rate whenever an AI Overview appeared above it. By early 2026, industry trackers estimated that AI generated summaries were showing up on close to half of all tracked Google searches, a sharp rise from under ten percent just two years earlier.

So the premise behind the worry is accurate. Fewer people are clicking through to read the original article. Search, the channel that built the entire blogging economy for two decades, is sending less traffic than it used to.

Why this does not mean blogging is finished

Here is the part that gets lost in the panic. AI answers have to come from somewhere. Every large language model and every AI search summary is built by reading, ranking and condensing text that a human being originally researched, tested and wrote down. Pew found that the typical AI summary cited three or more separate sources, and government and reference sites were cited noticeably more than average, meaning credible original material is exactly what these systems lean on. A blog is not competing against AI. In a very real sense, a blog is feeding it.

That dependence has created something new: a race among AI companies to secure reliable content, not avoid it. Major publishers including the Associated Press, Axios, The Guardian, News Corp and Conde Nast have signed licensing agreements with OpenAI, Google, Amazon and other AI developers, some reportedly worth tens of millions of dollars a year, specifically to keep their writing feeding these systems on agreed terms. At the same time, publishers who felt their work was taken without permission have gone to court. The New York Times is suing OpenAI and Microsoft. CNN sued Perplexity in 2026. News Corp sued Brave over how its content was being scraped. More than seventy separate copyright lawsuits against AI companies were active by the end of 2025, more than double the number from a year earlier.

None of this is happening because original writing has become worthless. It is happening because original writing turned out to be the raw material the entire AI industry runs on, and everyone involved, from billion dollar publishers to individual writers, is now working out what that material is worth and who should be paid for it.

What actually changes for an independent blogger

The honest answer is that the old game, where you wrote a post, ranked on Google, and collected ad revenue purely from search visitors, is weakening. Relying on search traffic alone as a business plan is riskier today than it was five years ago. But several things still work, and some work better than before.

• Being the cited source still counts. Seer Interactive found that brands mentioned inside an AI Overview earned around thirty five percent more of the remaining organic clicks than brands left out of it. Visibility inside the summary itself is becoming the new ranking position worth fighting for.
• Direct relationships matter more than search traffic ever did. Email lists, newsletters and returning readers are not affected by how Google displays its results page, because that traffic never depended on Google in the first place.
• Specific firsthand experience is difficult for a model to fake. A generic explanation of a topic is easy for AI to summarize and replace. A personal product test, an original photo, a documented case study or a strong opinion built on real experience is not something a summary can substitute for.
• Depth still has an audience. Readers who need a quick fact use AI. Readers who want to genuinely understand a topic, compare options or follow an argument still seek out full articles, and that audience tends to be more loyal and more valuable to advertisers and sponsors.

The fair question about getting paid

This brings up the second half of the worry, and it deserves a straight answer. If a blogger spends hours researching and writing something original, and an AI system reads that page and then answers a reader's question without sending them to the blog at all, how is the blogger supposed to earn anything from that work?

Right now there are three real paths being tested at once, and none of them existed in this form three years ago.

The first is licensing, the same model the big publishers are using, now becoming available to individual creators and smaller publishers as AI companies expand their programs to bring in more original content on agreed terms. 

The second is legal pressure, with the growing wave of lawsuits and the United States Copyright Office openly questioning whether unlicensed AI training qualifies as fair use, a debate whose outcome will shape whether smaller writers get paid too. 

The third, and the one within a blogger's own control today, is building an audience that AI cannot intercept, through email subscribers, a paid community, a product, a course or a service that grows out of the trust built by consistently useful writing.

None of these paths guarantee income the way ranking first on Google once did. But they describe a business built on being trusted by real people rather than one built entirely on being found by an algorithm, and that kind of business tends to survive changes in technology far better than one that depends on a single traffic source.

The honest conclusion

Blogging is not ending. 

The specific business model of writing generic articles purely to rank on Google and collect ad clicks is under serious pressure, and the data on click through rates leaves no real doubt about that. But the underlying activity, researching something carefully and explaining it clearly in your own voice, is more necessary than ever, because it is the exact thing every AI system needs and cannot fully create on its own. The blogs that struggle going forward will be the ones offering nothing a summary could not already provide. The blogs that thrive will be the ones offering something a summary never can: a real person, a real experience and a reason to keep reading.

So keep doing blogging.