The Failures of the 100-Point Rating Scale
Published March 22, 2007
The concept of rating wine is not without its uses. Certainly in today's market place, there are more wine consumers than ever and more wine producers delivering new bottles to them. Offering some guidance while browsing crowded store shelves or giving a previously anonymous vineyard recognition for good winemaking are some of the benefits of a rating system, but there is a dark side to rating wine - and the 100-point rating scale is the culprit.
The 100-point rating scale has grown into a behemoth that dictates far too much perception in the wine industry. It has the potential to crush the most ambitious of grape. A winemaker can see their business soar when their wines are given a 90 and sour when their wines are given an 89. All it takes is a lower rating to leave a Merlot morose, cause a Cabernet to sour, and force a bottle of Port, in a fit of hopelessness, to end it all by tipping itself over. It has carved such a niche in the industry that even editors of publications like Wine & Spirit and Wine Spectator — who are frustrated by the limitations of the system — are forced to use it to keep their circulation numbers up.
This dissatisfaction with the system from within major players in the industry is peculiar. Winemakers and writers everywhere outwardly admit the system is flawed and often misses the point, yet most are paralyzed by inaction. There are no marches against it. There are no signs protesting its existence. There are no telethons to stop it. In fact, Jesse Jackson has probably never even heard of it. Wine drinkers, winemakers, and wine sellers, whether we realize it or not, all fall victim to the rating scale. It is stunting the potential for the industry and cheating the average wine consumer.
Your Palette is Your Own - and Science Agrees
Wine consumers are often insecure about what constitutes a "good" wine. That, more than anything, has driven the popularity of the system. While it would be righteous to say no one should be told what wines they should and shouldn't like, the reality is science is discovering that taste isn't only dictated by preference - it's actually a matter of genetics. In 2003, Nature Genetics published an article detailing a study performed by researchers at the Weizmann Institute. These researchers discovered 50 odor-detecting receptors that are turned "on" in certain individuals and turned "off" in others. These receptors allow the nose to perceive aromas and then tell the brain how to perceive taste. Thus, a person with certain receptors turned "on" will taste things dramatically different than a person with those receptors turned "off."
- The Failures of the 100-Point Rating Scale
- Published: March 22, 2007
- Type: Opinion
- Section: Tastes
- Filed Under: Culture: Society, Tastes: Food and Drink
- Writer: Jenn Jordan
- Jenn Jordan's BC Writer page
- Jenn Jordan's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments on this articleComments
The market lacks the transparency in wine ratings and wine pricing. Wine producers and wine merchants know a great deal about them. On the other hand, the public in general has no way of knowing or determining the ratings and pricing on the spot, while buying wine at the store or over the net.
As a result, the wine merchant has an upper hand in these transactions and can induce the buyer into buying a low ranking wine or grossly overpriced wine. Often, we see wine bottles prominently for sale at a local store at say, $25 a bottle. A quick check shows that its 'street price' is only $8.
If the wine industry was regulated same way as, say, debt or equity markets, you would see a lot of wine dealers and wine merchants behind bars.
Well, the industry is not regulated and you and I are taken to the cleaners every day.
www.Wines.mobi site is designed to level the playing field. Next time you buy a bottle of wine check WineRank on your cell or PDA for prices and wine ratings.
Wines.mobi website uses a 100-Point Wine Rating Scale. Ratings, directly or indirectly, are based on chance and probability. There is a continuum of wines from exceptionally good to good, so-so, to just awful and vinegar. A scale that doesn't incorporate these extremes simply doesn't do justice to wine. As a matter of fact, even the best and the most expensive wines degrade with time and go to wine hell - the vinegars. Some wines take 100 years to get there, some are born that way.
To ignore the universe of wine ratings and to focus only on the upper part of the rating scheme is just plain wrong.
Wines.mobile is attempting to right the wrong. We give you the real prices. And we give you a true 100-Point Wine Ratings Scale.
96-100 - Extraordinary; a classic wine
91-95 -- Outstanding; superior wine
81-90 -- Very good to terrific; a great wine
71-80 -- Good to very good; wine with special qualities
61-70 - Slightly above average to good; wine with various degrees of flavor
51-60 -- Average; little distinction beyond being soundly made
41-50 -- Below average; probably drinkable. This is what French call 'vin de merde'' -- politely put ... by a prominent French wine connoisseur, François Mauss' when they talk about wines destined for the USA.
31-40 -- Poor; probably drinkable. May have a slight vinegary edge & vinegary flavors.
21-30 -- Undrinkable, made of grapes, rotten apples or other fruits. Loved by winos on a low budget
11-20 - Horrible & awful; undrinkable, not recommended
1-10 - Vinegars, good and bad. Don't drink!
While ratings may influence your decision, the ultimate judgment is yours. It's important to remember that everyone has a different palate and different preferences, so basing purchases on ratings may not garner the perfect wine match for your tastes.
Add your comment, speak your mind
(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/61422)
Very good analysis of the idiocy of the 100 pt system, but as long as Robt Parker uses it, it's going to be hard to get rid of.
It becomes even more absurd when Parker rates, say, a 2006 first-growth bordeaux at a 97. The people who can afford it go scurrying to spend the $250+ the wine commands...but no one tells them that rating may change dramatically as the wine ages. They tell them to let it age, but some people like the high tanins, thinking that means the wine's big--not just young.
Others don't understand a subtle, aged wine at all. I was with important clients with the president of my company some years ago, and he handed me the wine list. To my delight, there was a 1982 Chateau Montrose. As soon as I tasted it, I realized my mistake--it was perfect, but soft and subtle...not like those California reds bathed in butter.
Strong food would kill it. It wasn't a food wine, so I suggested that we all enjoy the wine with a light first course and order something else afterwards.
My president tasted the wine and almost spit it out. He thought it terrible, so he ordered a first growth (I wish I could remember which) that was maybe 3-4 years old and a virgin.) That to him was wine.
Why the hell am I ranting all over the place.
Anyway, I think your idea of pairing wines with occassions is very smart & there are loads of vino out there that I'd call very good (for the price) at under $10 or $15.
Looking forward to your recommendations.
In Jameson Veritas