Where to with wine scores? Part 1

If we are to attempt to rank anything, whether it be cars, books, restaurants or wine we need a system to rank them by, otherwise how would you know good from bad? For instance: out of 5, or 20 or 100, or a system of 1 to 5 stars etc.

Personally I think any score out of 100 is fundamentally flawed and a nonsense and this is especially true when it comes to wine, however much of the wine industry is built on nonsense.

How many times have you seen a wine scored 10? Remember this is out of 100. Or 40 or 60 or 80? Almost never, and in the case of a score under 70, never! You may find some scored in the high 80’s yet you won’t find much text around them. So, what’s the point of a score out of 100 when 5 or 10 or 20 would suffice?

There’s an element of psychology when it comes to numbers or rankings or scorings, people associate high ranks with better products, so a score of 7 out of 10 would not necessarily look as good as say a score of 90 out of 100 even though in real terms it’s much the same. The higher the score the better a level of association with how ‘great’ the product is.

This mass hypnosis is nothing more than a marketing gimmick. If I told you this wine was great you would want a score, and more disappointingly you would want to know who gave it. How many times have you heard or had a conversation that when like this:

You say: “I had a great bottle of wine with dinner last night”

The reply: “Really? What is it?”

You: “A South Aussie shiraz, made by XYZ Winery, pretty dam impressed it really went well with the meal”

Reply: “Interesting, might have to see if I can find a bottle” a pause and you can see it coming “Oh by the way do you know what Mr X (wine critic) gave it?”

Or you are speaking to someone, who I usually refer to as a CTRFW (Can’t tell red from white), and they just nod politely and ask how much it was. Price matters sure, yet this tends to sum up most replies I often get, sadly.

This is typical of what takes place. Look at any marketing material that comes from your local wine merchant. Mr X gave this 95 points; Ms Y 92 points; XYZ Publication rated it as ‘outstanding’ and gave it 94. There are 2 problems with this as I see it, the first is that the only wines worth putting in the junk mail are wines worthy of points over 90 – and let’s not forget that if Mr X or Ms Y or XYZ Publication hasn’t given it a score then one of their unnamed “experts” has given it a score that is sure to be over 90. Mmm…

Wine is inextricably linked to price and score. It doesn’t matter how you look at it, price is quite possibly the most important factor followed quickly by a score, or a gold medal – oh boy, don’t get me started on the “medal’s” you find plastered all over wine bottles these days.

So, why bother with 100? What does 1 to 100 offer that 1 to 20 doesn’t? I defy, and while I will never get an answer, anyone to explain how having a score of up to 100 will make any difference in what you are attempting to convey about the quality of the wine!

Why not have it out of 1,000 or 1,000,000? It would be as meaningless as a score of 100. If the rankings of wine pretty much didn’t stop  at 85 to 88 then 100 would be useful, yet wine isn’t ranked any lower, this might be for good reason, you might as well be drinking ‘turps’, so why not scale back the rank?

It’s this pretence that 100 is better than 5 or 20 that has created a ranking system that just defies reality and logic.

Next, how can you possibly give each of these wines the same score … there nothing a like!