Wednesday, October 13, 2004

A Word or Two on Wine Scores

I by no means have the million dollar palette of Robert Parker, but for most of us who is Parker anyway? Just another numerical data point...who tastes a ton, gets paid a ton and who's books weigh a ton. Well, maybe after 25 years you get to be the shiznet and rate wines on a 100 point scale.

I on the other hand, thanks to some coaching from bloggers wiser than me, will be rating with a 10-point scale. Quite simply (and simplicity is the point) its a lot like grade school - anything below a 6.0 (i.e. a D) is a failure and anything above a 9.0 (i.e. an A) is some pretty outstanding stuff. For more on adventures in numerical wine scoring go here, here, here or here.

There's plenty of debate on the merits of wine scoring. Personally, I have three reasons for scoring wines.

  1. I take pleasure in tasting, describing those tastes and quantifying how much I enjoyed those tastes. I can't help it. I'm a math geek, it's in my DNA.
  2. I look forward to seeing how a wine evolves, improves or degenerates over time.
  3. Given a choice, I'd rather drink a wine (or style of wine) that I had previously rated as a 10.0 rather than a 7.5.

Again these reasons are personal. The merits of Parker or Laube rating wines is another issue all together. Which will be discussed here at a later date.