It’s easy for one who follows wine as closely as most of my
wine friends to understand the nuance and subjectivity of the 100 point rating system. A
92 on a given wine can mean completely different things depending on the reviewer.
A 92 can also mean completely different things to the reader. There can be any
numbers of variables in play; we all know that. Understanding it in this way
makes it no different than placing in the proper perspective the rating system
of any given form of art, craft or culture.
To me, the dynamic that comes into play with wine ratings is
the factor of intimidation on the part of a given consumer. No matter what type
of music a person listens to, they’re probably not intimidated by the subject
of “music.” On some level there’s a common bond that everyone has with it. Styles
and preferences go from there, and a person thus knows how to place the subject
of music criticism in perspective according their context.
The same could be said for many other forms of reviews.
Movies, books, food – we’re not really intimidated by those words alone. A
person can choose the level of criticism to follow based on the area of
interest one has within the subject. Also the great works of literature, music and
film do not have a collectable aspect to them.
I think of wine criticism as I would art criticism. A work
of art is finite and can fetch great sums of money. Collectable wine is
similar. So the original context of the criticism takes on an entirely
different meaning. To me it filters down through all levels of a wine
purchasing decision. Ultimately, the wine review is a statement on the relative
value of a purchase decision.
A person may love wine and care about it enough to spend
large sums of money on it, but they may not sit on the computer writing wine
blogs and reading wine message boards to the point where they assign context to
a wine review. Or the person walking into a store may love to drink wine, but
doesn’t feel comfortable asking a question. This is the point where the wine review
along with an assigned number becomes king.
Two moments I experienced over the last week shed light on
why the debate over the 100-point scale in wine criticism continues to live and
breathe as it does. Whether on blogs or part of winery marketing, it’s an
exhaustive dialogue that constantly breathes with new life.
I was working with a guest in a tasting room the other day.
The guest was reading a sheet of recent reviews and asked with a sense of
amazement how the stated drinking windows of the wines could vary as written.
It was as if ‘the word is law.’ A few days later I was speaking with a wine
merchant about the change in California
reviewing in The Wine Advocate. A customer who had purchased and enjoyed recent
vintages of a wine that Robert Parker gave 98 points was reluctant to buy the
new vintage of the same that Antonio Galloni gave 95 points. It’s as if the
publication was a united front that could not allow for a deviation of 3 points
at the top of the scale from one reviewer to another.
That’s a lot of power to give to subjective numbers.
