Comments on: The straight dope on wine reviewer inconsistency: A long post on an important topic http://www.steveheimoff.com/index.php/2009/01/30/the-straight-dope-on-wine-reviewer-consistency-a-long-post-on-an-important-topic/ A blog about the world of wine Thu, 09 Feb 2012 05:14:27 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.3 By: Penelope http://www.steveheimoff.com/index.php/2009/01/30/the-straight-dope-on-wine-reviewer-consistency-a-long-post-on-an-important-topic/comment-page-1/#comment-2829 Penelope Thu, 05 Feb 2009 19:51:33 +0000 http://www.steveheimoff.com/?p=1794#comment-2829 Very well said, Steve, and a great admission to the human condition- there are so many things that can play into the perception of how a wine tastes or smells. As a winemaker, not only my own brand, but also for a custom crush facility, I have to weigh on a regular basis how things are progressing. With that said, there are days that I decide not to taste or to put it off because my mood isn't right, I just had a piece of gum, or it is late in the day, allergies, whatever-and I know I will not judge them with the proper perspective. Wine judges do not have that latitude- wines are there to be tasted regardless of what you have just tasted or something in the lineup that can make the next wine either better or not quite right. In my view if all things could be controlled- black glasses, taste the same wine at the same time of the day, everyone gets a sudafed, use robots, and more controls that I could put on the page. But that wouldn't be any fun, would it? I agree that sticking with a reviewer that you seem to match tastes with is a good way to go if you need suggestions. Wines in competitions should be looked at as cumulative- meaning if it has the same 'rating' or seems to at least be recognized, you probably have something worthwhile. The use of particular words or descriptors is an interesting debate with respect to wine. Sweet for one person may have a good connotation, bad for another. The word itself can be perceived wrong-does it really mean sugar sweet or is it just 'fruity'? I had a descriptor of hazelnut and I had a consumer come back asking if the wine had nuts in it...... Not sure that there can ever be a perfect way to score or evaluate-we are human. So much more that an be said on this topic-but I think I have put in more than my 2 cents, The Mustang Winemaker Very well said, Steve, and a great admission to the human condition- there are so many things that can play into the perception of how a wine tastes or smells. As a winemaker, not only my own brand, but also for a custom crush facility, I have to weigh on a regular basis how things are progressing. With that said, there are days that I decide not to taste or to put it off because my mood isn’t right, I just had a piece of gum, or it is late in the day, allergies, whatever-and I know I will not judge them with the proper perspective. Wine judges do not have that latitude- wines are there to be tasted regardless of what you have just tasted or something in the lineup that can make the next wine either better or not quite right. In my view if all things could be controlled- black glasses, taste the same wine at the same time of the day, everyone gets a sudafed, use robots, and more controls that I could put on the page. But that wouldn’t be any fun, would it?
I agree that sticking with a reviewer that you seem to match tastes with is a good way to go if you need suggestions. Wines in competitions should be looked at as cumulative- meaning if it has the same ‘rating’ or seems to at least be recognized, you probably have something worthwhile.
The use of particular words or descriptors is an interesting debate with respect to wine. Sweet for one person may have a good connotation, bad for another. The word itself can be perceived wrong-does it really mean sugar sweet or is it just ‘fruity’? I had a descriptor of hazelnut and I had a consumer come back asking if the wine had nuts in it……
Not sure that there can ever be a perfect way to score or evaluate-we are human.
So much more that an be said on this topic-but I think I have put in more than my 2 cents,

The Mustang Winemaker

]]> By: steve http://www.steveheimoff.com/index.php/2009/01/30/the-straight-dope-on-wine-reviewer-consistency-a-long-post-on-an-important-topic/comment-page-1/#comment-2792 steve Wed, 04 Feb 2009 02:33:30 +0000 http://www.steveheimoff.com/?p=1794#comment-2792 Methinks the competitions are in dire straits these days, like everyone else. Methinks the competitions are in dire straits these days, like everyone else.

]]> By: Lee http://www.steveheimoff.com/index.php/2009/01/30/the-straight-dope-on-wine-reviewer-consistency-a-long-post-on-an-important-topic/comment-page-1/#comment-2789 Lee Wed, 04 Feb 2009 00:26:24 +0000 http://www.steveheimoff.com/?p=1794#comment-2789 An interesting footnote from a small winery: the people from the Dallas Morning News Competition won't stop calling and emailing trying to get us to submit our wines. Seems like revenues must down there, too and I can't say I am disappointed. Think and drink for yourselves consumers! An interesting footnote from a small winery: the people from the Dallas Morning News Competition won’t stop calling and emailing trying to get us to submit our wines. Seems like revenues must down there, too and I can’t say I am disappointed. Think and drink for yourselves consumers!

]]> By: David Creighton http://www.steveheimoff.com/index.php/2009/01/30/the-straight-dope-on-wine-reviewer-consistency-a-long-post-on-an-important-topic/comment-page-1/#comment-2749 David Creighton Mon, 02 Feb 2009 16:12:39 +0000 http://www.steveheimoff.com/?p=1794#comment-2749 a couple of small and large points. i too am a judge and wine writer. wine competitions are artifical environments where like it or not wines are judged against each other. i'd love to know if the same wines were scored radically differently among the same set of wines or in different sets. this problem of consistency ONLY occurs when wines are judged in competitions. i am positive that any judge drinking the same wine with appropriate and similar foods(something you would normally do at home) will judge the same wine similarly over time. for this reason, i try never to recommend a wine in print that i have not had a chance to have alone and with food. i also wish the statisticians would help us all out by telling us - if they know - how the inconsistencies occur. do wines tend to be judged better earlier in the day and less well later; or vice versa; or is it random? one minor point: judges who say that wines are worth 97pts or are undrinkable probably don't last long as judges - at least i hope not. the discussion at least initially should be about the attributes of the wine - why it is worth high marks or why it is a bad wine. if one person thinks it undrinkable because of high levels of brett and the others either aren't sensitive(mostly the case) or don't mind it, then we know the issue and can discuss it. 'undrinkable' doesn't help. a couple of small and large points. i too am a judge and wine writer.
wine competitions are artifical environments where like it or not wines are judged against each other. i’d love to know if the same wines were scored radically differently among the same set of wines or in different sets.

this problem of consistency ONLY occurs when wines are judged in competitions. i am positive that any judge drinking the same wine with appropriate and similar foods(something you would normally do at home) will judge the same wine similarly over time. for this reason, i try never to recommend a wine in print that i have not had a chance to have alone and with food.

i also wish the statisticians would help us all out by telling us – if they know – how the inconsistencies occur. do wines tend to be judged better earlier in the day and less well later; or vice versa; or is it random?

one minor point: judges who say that wines are worth 97pts or are undrinkable probably don’t last long as judges – at least i hope not. the discussion at least initially should be about the attributes of the wine – why it is worth high marks or why it is a bad wine. if one person thinks it undrinkable because of high levels of brett and the others either aren’t sensitive(mostly the case) or don’t mind it, then we know the issue and can discuss it. ‘undrinkable’ doesn’t help.

]]> By: mark bunter http://www.steveheimoff.com/index.php/2009/01/30/the-straight-dope-on-wine-reviewer-consistency-a-long-post-on-an-important-topic/comment-page-1/#comment-2747 mark bunter Mon, 02 Feb 2009 15:52:58 +0000 http://www.steveheimoff.com/?p=1794#comment-2747 Steve- You like dry wine? Cool. I understand the distinction you plead, one judgement as opposed to a committee "average". As you say, it's a different thing, criticism/writing is, from judging. Ray- Yeah, the UCD attitude does kinda ask what's wrong with a wine, rather than what's right, but, based on their purpose, that's a good thing. There are a few hangovers from the bad old days, like the 20 point methodology, that over- rewards color (just like most of us) and lack of ascesence Steve- You like dry wine? Cool. I understand the distinction you plead, one judgement as opposed to a committee “average”. As you say, it’s a different thing, criticism/writing is, from judging.
Ray- Yeah, the UCD attitude does kinda ask what’s wrong with a wine, rather than what’s right, but, based on their purpose, that’s a good thing. There are a few hangovers from the bad old days, like the 20 point methodology, that over- rewards color (just like most of us) and lack of ascesence

]]>