Both got the same score … how? Part 2

In another blow to the wine industry is the nonsense of scores based on nothing other than the taste. Yes, that’s what I wrote, based on taste.

Before you start let me explain. Wine is all about taste, however there are a number of fundamental points to a wine, so let me name just a few: type; region; variety; age; price point; heritage.

Of the most important is price. Why price? Simple, it’s the single most determining factor when someone purchases a bottle. Try as hard as you like to argue this point, you know it’s true. There are those who are just snobs and won’t spend under x amount because they think it will be rubbish, and of course there is the high end who are buying wine that comes AT a price, not at a price. So the price determines which bottle goes home to dinner than night.

So, and to the biggest question on most peoples lips – which has never been answered honestly – is how can a $100 bottle of wine (or a $1000 bottle) get a score of 95 and a $18 bottle can get the same score.

Let’s not confuse types and varieties and age just yet. A straight and this is hypothetical, shot-out between let’s say two Barossa 08 Shiraz’s. Let’s establish the ground rules:

1. Both are in the same region (demographically)

2. Both had the same conditions – wind, rain, sun, storms, fire, etc. I will accept that one could have been a little more prone to, say wind, or on more of a slope yet this is argument for the sake of argument.

3. Both are well known wineries with, equally good wine makers who have been established for some time and have a history of producing good wine.

4. Both make the same type of wine, that is: a Shiraz

Now there are other considerations yet these are some of the basics. The grape is picked, and the wine – the end result – is made pretty much the same way, apart from (of course) the wine makers little bag of tricks to make his/her wine.

The bottle is packaged and off it goes to all the obligatory wine shows and door-steps of those in the business to get the final ingredient: a score, a ranking, a bit of text for publication, the medals to stick all over the bottle – these are important after all, and depending on what is said it can mean the difference between selling out in a month, or being lucky to sell a case or two.

So, you walk into your local wine shop and there are two bottles of wine. A well respected wine critic has given his seal of approval to both drops with a (in the wine makers mind) richly rewarded 95 points!

Now one is price at $18 and the other is $180. Remember both are a Shiraz, from the same region, same age, same score etc., and you ask yourself “how, what, umm, I don’t understand”.

You, the buyer are no more confused than the ‘respected’ critic who gave a score of 95 to both wines. This sort of score cannot possibly convey any information to you (the buyer) that could be deemed useful. The only thing you can take from this is, the wine – both – must be good. That’s it! Yet you have no idea as to the wines potential (cellaring), its characteristic’s, volume (how much is made) or what makes one worth $162 more than the other.

This is bullshit. There is no other way to look at it. The points system doesn’t allow for any movement in the wine and what it is. What I mean by this is that some wines need to be taken in context. Now, not all wine prices are known when tasted and scored, yet this is an acceptation not a rule, so we can discount this argument. Wines are generally tasted against its peers, so we can discount this argument – that wine tasting is done in a vacuum and is only rated on the merits of the wine at the time. Wines are generally known when tasted, so we can discount this argument, that wines are all blind tasted and there is no idea as to the history or potential of a particular wine.

So, and while it would be a nightmare to administer and more so to use when purchasing wine, there should be a significantly better mechanism for judging wine by scores, and making that score fit a relevant and MEANINGFUL description to those who purchase that wine. While there is this difficultly there cannot possibly be any serious argument that the current scoring is better than nothing, as it actually provides nothing of any use to anyone, other than giving the winery and some marketing groups the impetus to try and sell their wine based on some sort of arbitrary mickey mouse scoring system: “roll-up, roll-up, come buy my wine it got 97 from Mr X”, whereas in fact it should read: “roll-up, roll-up, buy my wine if you like, it got 97 yet so did 15 other wines ranging from $20 cheaper than mine to $450 dearer”.

I can think of a number of ways to make this fairer – that is, to wineries, yet some won’t agree and those who buy wine – yet I won’t bore you with how this could be done, it’s more a case of you thinking a little harder next time you say you brought a 97 scored bottle of wine for $250, because guess what, so did I and mine was only $20.