Rant-What's Going On With Wine Reviewers?

[Chuck]

I think Halliday's rating are a little generous and I usually deduct a few points. I can live with that. It now looks like other reviewers have jumped on the bandwagon giving this wine 100 points and that 99 with most wines 90+. Comparing these ratings to those on Cellartracker and Winefront and the gulf is huge. What are these guys trying to prove? How can anyone rely on these ratings? I'm not naming names in case I'm completely off track.

Carl

[winetastic]

most wines 90+l

This is likely due to the fact wines scoring lower are not having their reviews published.

[Chris H]

Forget points. Bring in the nice rating system as it avoids the points issues completely :

Almost nice
Reasonably nice
Nice
Nice indeed
Very nice
Splendidly nice
Phwoah

[TiggerK]

Yeah all about getting the name out there on the shelves or online, creating hype and becoming so famous they get invited to the fancy events for free and get loads of wine turning up at their door, heck maybe even get paid enough to quit the day job etc etc etc. I'm sure it's really frustrating for those who try and stay moderate, yet even they will eventually succumb to a certain extent. 99 is the new 96, it's pathetic. If advertisers or sales staff start quoting points to me they quickly and politely get shut down or ignored. Wow! - A 99 point wine for only $16.99 - Don't miss out!!" AARRRGGGHHHHH

Chris' list reminds me of the monghead scale.

http://forum.auswine.com.au/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=11372&p=89606&#p89606

[Ozzie W]

Wineries and wine stores love these crazy high Halliday ratings. They exploit it to help them move stock and often to justify their high prices.

[felixp21]

Sadly, the 100 point rating scale has become a complete nonsense. Let's be honest, how many 80 point wines have you seen?
The "excuse" that 80 point wines are not published is not true. It may be, to a minor extent in Australia, but reviews of virtually all European regions are all-inclusive. That means you are getting every wine reviewed.
At best, the "100 point" scale is, in fact, a 20 point scale.

Why has there been such a ridiculous wine score creep?
That is pretty easy to explain:
1. The wines are generally getting better, so the bottom wines are much better than they were 30-50 years ago. The top wines, however, remain a constant, and are usually vintage-dependant.
2. Good to great vintages are becoming more frequent in marginal wine growing regions, which is where the majority of the World's great vineyards lie. Therefore, there are more great wines and high scores.

OK, so there are the two good explanations as to why there is a score creep. Sadly, those two reasons are a minority.
So, what is the major reason?

3. The internet has vastly expanded our information highway, leading to a huge increase in the number of wine critics, be it main stream, wine blogs, youtube shows etc etc. So, how do these people gain an audience amongst this sea of critics? Again, easy, all you need to do is make sure you give dramatically high scores. Naturally, every retailer wants to publish the "100 point score" somebody has given the wine he wants to sell. Therefore, the "100 point" score is published, along with the critics name and tasting note, giving exposure to both the wine and the critic.
I bet everyone on this forum reads a tasting note and notices when a wine has garnered 100 points from some critic or another. It is only human nature. Remember the 2010 St Henri scam? Incredible. For those that don't remember that one, just open your inbox today and have a look at the e-tailer flogging the 2014 Amaranta Montepulciano d'Abruzzo, a "99 point wonder" scored by that famous critic Luca Maroney (no relation to Boney). It made headlines, as did the associated critic.
99 points, hey, 1% worse than the greatest wine ever made, whatever that might be. I saw this wine in a trade tasting a while back, it is a dramatic wine indeed, more a coconut milkshake than a wine, and almost impossible to drink more than a glass. 99 points? goodness, get real.

Conversely, who reads or purchases wines with an 82 point score. Not Joe Public, that's for sure. Neither Bill the retailer.... how is he going to sell an 82 point wine? So the wine doesn't get noticed, and neither does the critic. It's a lose-lose situation for the critic and retailer alike. (the only link in the chain that would benefit in this case would be the purchaser, but, hey, they don't matter)

So, unless you are at the top of the tree, akin to RPJ or HRH Jancis, you need to fight to be heard. Look at James Suckling's scores as an example. To me , it appears he score an average wine 93, a good wine 96 and an excellent wine 100. His score spread is about 15, at very most.
There are other examples, of course, but it gets boring mentioning them all.

So, this is a sad but undeniable fact, and it would be reasonable to assume that the current trends suggest we will end up with a 10 point scale in a few years.

[felixp21]

oh, and I should also mention the recent and appalling trend of a few restaurants actually publishing Critics scores on their wine lists!!!!!

[bdellabosca]

most wines 90+l

This is likely due to the fact wines scoring lower are not having their reviews published.

I'm not sure this is the case (although it is quite possible). My impression is that reviewers are putting more and more wines at the "top" ratings and shifting up what is a "top" rating. Obviously my impression is anecdotal only so very possible wrong.

I would be interested if anyone has any stats with individual reviews (maybe looking at point distribution of all wines reviewed by the critic for the past 10 years, etc...). Anyone have anything like that?

[mjs]

Don't know why we bother with a 100 point scale, the first 90 seem superfluous these days. Let's face it, what is the point of the first 80-85 points? I don't think that Sir James' scale has anything else on it in terms of two digits that don't start with 9.

I'd be happy to go with Chris or monghead's scales, they probably mean more, require more thought from the reviewer and we can all relate to each level. Not to mention, more fun.

Felixp21 raises some valid factors (was going to say "points", but thought better of it ). Yes, wine quality is generally getting better, both in terms of wine making and the more marginal areas. No excuse though for the score creep that I perceive. Bit like the boy who cried wolf, hard to get excited about anything that's advertised with copious scores in the mid and higher 90's.

[Chuck]

I wonder if the 2012 Grange (99 points by JH) is only marginally less in quality than the famous 1962 Penfolds Bin 60A (rated 7th greatest wine in the history of the world a couple of decades ago). I know what I'd prefer drinking and pay 10 times the cost if necessary. Sadly it's selling now for around $30,000+.

Carl

[Ozzie W]

From today's marketing emails in my inbox from different wine stores, these are the email subjects:

• 97 points and Possibly Clonakilla's best O'Riada?
• 97pt Ironheart Shiraz from 2016 Winemaker of the Year
• The 99 Point Italian Red - and it's very affordable
• 97pt Seppelt Riesling - "excellent release", limited allocation

Straight to the points! They're all doing it and I assume they get a good conversion rate otherwise they would use a different approach.

[JamieBahrain]

99 point Italian red? I'm backing up my truck Ozzie, but where?

I had Bruno Giacosa's Santo Stefano Riserva 1990 en magnum last year and assuming this a better drop?

[Ozzie W]

99 point Italian red? I'm backing up my truck Ozzie, but where?

I had Bruno Giacosa's Santo Stefano Riserva 1990 en magnum last year and assuming this a better drop?

Amaranta Montepulciano d'Abruzzo 2014

Rating: 99 Points & Best Italian Red Wine; Luca Maroni; Annuario Dei Migliori Vini Italiani (Best Italian Wines Annual 2016)

[bdellabosca]

Separate thought re critics and points - does anyone else think Campbell Mattinson (Winefront) has become more generous with his points on the Winefront platform since he started writing for Halliday as well?... could just be my imagination / paranoia.

[Polymer]

Winefront has always been generous with points....unless you mean more so....

The difference is they haven't hit the 99-100 point craziness...but they're still really high...I think Gary Walsh said something about it being in relation to how wines are scored in Australia or something like that..they're scoring to what the Australian consumer is expecting to see in relation to all the other critics...So if everyone is a consensus 96 they're not giving it a 90...even though if this was scored in a different region, 90 might be what they'd give it...

Realistically, if you wanted to be a wine critic in AU, you'd have to score it the same way...or you'd never develop your brand....This whole thing isn't exclusive to AU though...it is happening everywhere...in AU it just happened faster...

[Ian S]

Fully agree with the criticisms of the nature of the 100 point scale, leading to over-hype. A 2013 Barolo that has always been fair (but not stunning IMO) value got 'awarded' 100 points by Galloni and the Points whores (c Robert Parker) and opportunists pushed the price up to 3 times what it was.

Examples like this show that the 100 point-wielding critic, rather than being the winelover's ally, is the one driving prices up for them.

Never ever think that the self-appointed wine expert is a better chooser of wine (for you) than you are yourself.

[felixp21]

99 point Italian red? I'm backing up my truck Ozzie, but where?

I had Bruno Giacosa's Santo Stefano Riserva 1990 en magnum last year and assuming this a better drop?

haha, $29 in Australia, too, Jamie. Back up the train mate, happy days, you have a wine to drink for the rest of your life. In my experience, $29 retail in Australia means this wine is likely to cost about 5 euro ex-cellar to the export market.
Bruno Giacosa clearly has no idea what he is doing when some bloke down the road can make a wine as good as the best he has ever made for 5 euro!!!! All those expensive bottles of Bordeaux and Burgundy I have stashed about the place are simply a waste of money, I should just have waited for this wine and purchased the entire vintage!!!

[Gary W]

Winefront has always been generous with points....unless you mean more so....

The difference is they haven't hit the 99-100 point craziness...but they're still really high...I think Gary Walsh said something about it being in relation to how wines are scored in Australia or something like that..they're scoring to what the Australian consumer is expecting to see in relation to all the other critics...So if everyone is a consensus 96 they're not giving it a 90...even though if this was scored in a different region, 90 might be what they'd give it...

Realistically, if you wanted to be a wine critic in AU, you'd have to score it the same way...or you'd never develop your brand....This whole thing isn't exclusive to AU though...it is happening everywhere...in AU it just happened faster...

They are all scored on the same basis. MR Cabernet, Bordeaux, Barolo, Barossa. It would be INSANITY to handicap wines.

The rating scale is per this link - http://www.winefront.com.au/winorama-rating-system/ (I'd copy it, but it's a graphic).

I calibrated my rating scale to that of Halliday around 2002, but things have moved on, but it's still the scoring I use. 94=18.5=Gold medal. As much as I admire Jancis, I find her scoring system useless, and everything seems to be fence sitting 16.5 ish. Anyway, each to their own, have no axe to grind. I've also no problem giving a beautiful rose wine 94 points, or a young semillon - with an eye to the future - of course.

In terms of 'junkets' : I go on practically none, and don't attend gross lunches to taste a couple of wines. It's a waste of time, and time to review ratio. I don't do paid gigs for wineries. I don't do any consulting to wineries. We don't accept advertising from wineries.

I don't like the leading with stupid scores, and yes, I'm part of the problem, but possibly part of the solution too. The trend to quote 'man with a bottle and a nose on his face' as trusted source, by a few online retailers is kind of bemusing. I don't think the public are stupid. If Mr X says this wine is brilliant and 96 points, then they can only cry wolf so many times before Joe Public says "This person is SHIT!". The note is the important thing. We write a lot of words at TWF, and have, I think, three good communicators with individual styles. I think we have built up a lot of trust over the years, not only with paying subscribers (of course), but those who read the notes in retailer channels and in the trade. But that's my biased opinion.

On the Maroni things - those wines are like winemaker cocktails. I could only assume he loves oak and fruit milkshakes, or there may be some other sort of *ahem* relationship happening. I don't understand it, either way.

As an aside, I'd say, if anything I rate the Barolo a bit lower in scores than Suckling, Gallloni, Larner etc. Or sometimes higher, but often less extreme. I'm not knocking out 100s for the same wines Galloni has (and good on him if he wants to make a point, I don't care - he's not profligate).

Also, I'm not really that fussed if I'm quoted or not. We are doing very well financially, thank you very much, from subscription based revenue.

I acknowledge the trend to score higher, and if they are colleagues, I feel they are 'letting the team down'. However, as the market fragments, and trust is lost, I can only offer that we seem to be doing better than ever in terms of subscriber base.

Hope this helps a bit.
BR
GW

[Ozzie W]

Thanks for the informative response, Gary. Keep up the great work!

[felixp21]

Good response KnobHead.
Indeed, I agree that the wine-lover get's a much better idea as to whether he or she will like a particular wine by reading the review rather than simply gazing at the score. I honestly find the Wine Front reviews fantastic in that respect, you get a very good idea of the style of the wine and where it should be heading over the ensuing years as it matures.
If the World "team" of wine critics all re-calibrated their scoring system (I am excluding those idiotic wine shows where the supposed "judges" rate 300+ wines in a day, a total nonsense) then we would all be so much better off.
With the re-calibrated scores, 50 is a wine you can quaff and not think about, 60 your average plonk, 70 could be seen as a decent wine, 80 as excellent, 90 as stupendous and 100 as a pristine bottle of Penfold's 62 60A.
With this system, something like a Mike Press Shiraz would score a 78, and given it's price, people would certainly continue to purchase it. But pretending that Mike Press Shiraz is 5% a lesser wine than a pristine bottle of 60A is absurd, and everyone knows it.

But as everyone also knows, the re-calibration might last 3-5 years, for the reason (3) I detailed above.

The 100 point scale is really a fantastic idea if used properly, simply because if a reader is faced with a report that reviews 200+ wines, it is likely that he or she will gravitate to
(1) the top 20-30%, and
(2) wines they are personally interested in,
as most don't have time to wade thru all the reviews.

I can see exactly why TWF has re-calibrated it's scores as detailed by GW, it would be a significant commercial dis-advantage not to do so.

[JamieBahrain]

As an aside, I'd say, if anything I rate the Barolo a bit lower in scores than Suckling, Gallloni, Larner etc. Or sometimes higher, but often less extreme. I'm not knocking out 100s for the same wines Galloni has (and good on him if he wants to make a point, I don't care - he's not profligate).

I know I've mentioned this before, but I have heard Galloni say he'd never give the ridiculous 98-100pts scores for Barolo just a few years ago. He does now, no doubt due the pressure Felix alluded to: " an audience amongst the sea of critics "

[Redwine&Rum]

Got a call from a wynns sales rep the other day. First thing he pretty much said was the 2015 Cabernet received 98 points from Huon Hooke. Straight off the bat. High points = high sales. I didn't buy any because I've already got a boat load of Wynns in the cellar, but it is a definitive sales technique.

[Scotty vino]

So I'm at unnamed Cellar door in the Barossa. A chap comes in the door accompanied by a tour guide.
He wants a case of the new release wine that received the 'points'. The cellar door attendant informs the man that the wine is open for tasting right here, right now. Won't hurt to make sure you like it? No interest. It's got 'points' it has to be amazing.
Man leaves with a case....

[marsalla]

I am thinking about starting a wine reviewer review site. I will get all the reviewers to provide me free access to their reviews and I will mark them on their reviews. The scores will be based on a harmonic progression, which will keep things nice and obscure.

Scores are good, I find them useful, but all reviewers appear to have their favourites and blind spots, Halliday is no exception.

Reviewers bagging wine shows get a bit tiring though, looks like bagging the opposition, which is a bit uncool I reckon.

[Bobthebuilder]

So I'm at unnamed Cellar door in the Barossa. A chap comes in the door accompanied by a tour guide.
He wants a case of the new release wine that received the 'points'. The cellar door attendant informs the man that the wine is open for tasting right here, right now. Won't hurt to make sure you like it? No interest. It's got 'points' it has to be amazing.
Man leaves with a case....

Could someone lend me a hand as I need to do a triple facepalm

[Craig(NZ)]

109 Points

Trail blazers are always mocked, but then a time comes where there is nowhere else to go except to follow the path

[Ian S]

So I'm at unnamed Cellar door in the Barossa. A chap comes in the door accompanied by a tour guide.
He wants a case of the new release wine that received the 'points'. The cellar door attendant informs the man that the wine is open for tasting right here, right now. Won't hurt to make sure you like it? No interest. It's got 'points' it has to be amazing.
Man leaves with a case....

Huge credit to the person at the cellar door - indeed they probably deserve a name check for doing the right thing in trying to ensure the wine was one the guy would like.

One other possibility, maybe that guy was a 'flipper'. Buying it because he thought he could make a quick buck. More prevalent in the US, but probably exists to a lesser degree the world over.

[Ian S]

109 Points

Trail blazers are always mocked, but then a time comes where there is nowhere else to go except to follow the path

Yes, however not just 109 points, but with 3 decimal places of accuracy! Many a genius has been mocked for being ahead of their time.

[Ian S]

As for Luca Maroni, I bought one of his books a while ago, to see what his opinions were and to practice my Italian. I found the whole thing dreadful, from a genuinely stupid scoring methodology, poor writing / presentation style and opinions which gave the impression he had a very distinct palate.

I'm surprised he's still going but seems to be prospering.

[felixp21]

As for Luca Maroni, I bought one of his books a while ago, to see what his opinions were and to practice my Italian. I found the whole thing dreadful, from a genuinely stupid scoring methodology, poor writing / presentation style and opinions which gave the impression he had a very distinct palate.

I'm surprised he's still going but seems to be prospering.

haha, meter out some 99-100 point scores and off you go!!!
case in point with the email yesterday, most Aussie wine-lovers have now heard of him. Almost all would never have heard of him the day before that email went out.
GW made a good point about having to back up the points with something that actually tastes good.... I suspect these writers like Suckling, Huon Hooke and Boney Maroney will fizzle out over the next decade or so if they don't become more realistic in their assessments.
Of course, there is the elephant in the room not yet discussed, that being any "incentive" a critic might gain from a particular producer. It happens, oh yes indeed. A lot. Enough said.
Lastly, of course, there are the talentless scribes who pretty much score wines on reputation. In 2014, we were sitting n a bar with a couple of wine-makers in Burgundy, and we decided to score wines that a certain critic would give for the 2015 vintage!!!! I could almost here the giggles from Beaune 15,000kms away when the scores were published and indeed, we were virtually spot on with every wine