Relevance of Point Scores in Wine
As many of you may know I am constantly challenged by the validity of wine point scores, the main reason being that they merely represent a point in time in a wines developmental life cycle and I do not believe that they provide a definitive statement of the overall quality or lack there of.
Wines are assessed and judged within a very narrow band of scoring which is between 85-100 points which in itself has many flaws and limitations, not to mention we also have a 20 point and 5 point scoring scales no matter what they all achieve the same outcome.
There's no absolute in wine scoring. A wine might receive a gold medal award from a generous critic while another critic may give the same wine a silver medal and a wine show a bronze medal. Who's right ? As long as critics and wine competitions apply their judging standards consistently they are all right. Consistency is the key - Bob Campbell NZ Wine Writer
I would agree with Campbell as consistency is the key to any assessment relating to wine and there no absolutes , so lets look at a couple of examples and test my thinking:
and
What strikes me here is that the same wines are not normally entered for consideration year after year, well at 99 points or 100 points is there much room for further improvement so it is unusual from my research to see to many wines being resubmitted for assessment from one year to another especially if they have been highly scored
Maybe there is and maybe there is not as does a 99 point wine like the Grange 2010 & 2012 always remain a a 99 point wine or do they start to loose their lustre as time progresses?
Let's turn the argument a little , take for example if a wine one year is given a score of 85 points, nothing wrong with that wine is still very well made and high quality.
A few years later it is reentered for consideration and ends up with a 94 points one has to question what is the true score for this wine is it the 94 or is it the 85?
What I am suggesting if that is there some form of pure elasticity in point scores as wine as a product is relatively inelastic as it has many other options available
As we know some wines take time to show their true capability and capacity which answers the question about why they are held back from judging and release , this is most evident in the wine wines of Burgundy.
A good Bourgogne Premier Cru Pinot Noir needs about 5 years to start to show its potential , a Chardonnay and especially a Chablis needs between 2-4 years to show all of its potential complexity and elegance this is why you see so very few current year reviews for Burgundy wines
When young the Bourgogne Pinot Noir can be quite vegetative , stalky, lean and fleshy, the Chablis on the other hand can be quite acidic, lacking balance , structure and driven by a strong lime/lemon profile.
if these wines were entered for judging which would normally not take place much before 2 years after vintage how would they be scored in comparison to when they 5-7 years old?
My point here is that point scores a relative time based assessment of wine at a given point in time by one individual or panel, god knows even across wine writers very few of them ever agree with each others scoring.
领英推荐
Huon Hooke is accused of marking down wines and being 5-7 points lower than James Halliday, Robert Parker was accused of inflating scores other writers are accused of bias and having their favourites especially in the Low-Fi and Natural wines, so this means that it comes down to whom you think has the most credibility and most credible point scoring system.
Most wines are assessed using three key criteria
So wine should be judged on a level playing field or maybe not!
I believe that we have made wine to complicated, we have turned wine into a numerical output and we have stripped away the beauty of wine in the name of creating some form of bankable currency or to create a model of quality which is driven by the highest number.
Its sad but wine is business and high point scores are currency as they are easier to shift by wine makers and also easier to sell by retailers as the assumption sadly is that the higher the point the better the wine and the higher the price it can command.
I wonder what happens when so many wines are scored 99 or 100 points will we have to expand the point scoring table to allow for wines to be judged above 100, I will leave that with you to contemplate .
Cheers
Leigh
Accounting Navigator Now retired Partner at Deloitte Australia, National Wine Industry Leader
1 年Leigh W Dryden I think that scores are but just an indicator but where it might give an interesting story is too see how a particular wine rates across a matrix of say 5 wine writers across vintages and vintages over time If I use Penfolds as an example and because it’s well known Take Bin 389 it scores well every vintage across many judges and scores well when tasted a various ages You take a lesser known wine which does not have a consistent track record and very little is cellared properly to determine its ageing capability I am wandering in my thoughts but for many buyers they want todays score because that’s when they will drink it, but some including collectors and those who want to experience older wines the aging capability is important I use scores as a guide as I do medals but ultimately my experience with wine for the price I pay drives my decisions