That Old Chestnut - Points Scoring

[Gianna]

Now I know that this topic has had more than several runs over many years on this forum, but I'm going to throw out a comment on tasting notes and scoring and see what comes back.

" I think all tasting notes should come with a points score "

To me, the points score should be judged upon a composite value-based approach that emcompasses the following:

1. Quality of the wine - color / nose / taste / aftertaste
2. A rating on the ethereal experience of the wine
3. Value for money
4. How close it goes to being an ultimate wine experience

Therefore, just because a $10 bottle was bloody good value, doesn't rate it as a 98pt wine.
Conversly, just because a particular bottle of grange was an awesome experience, it too needs to justify it's lofty $450 price tag to gain such a high rating.

Whilst I certainly value and appreciate the effort each forumite makes in posting their notes, I still feel it lacks that final judgement "je ne se qua" without the writer providing a points score to allow the reader to ponder.

Over time, readers will adjust to the writer's personal scoring system and assess accordingly.
EG: when BCP would give a 96pts to a wine, you knew it was special.

So there you go, can everyone now please add a score to their tasting notes.....

[rooman]

No

[Luke W]

Gianna

I think I see where you're coming from but personally I think points are pretentious and are an attempt to quantify a subjective experience. If for example I drank grange every night or an equivalent and then had a rockford I might give the wine a lower score than if I drank lesser bottles. I found this out by going on a binge of fabulous wines and then going back to my quaffers which up to that point had served me well, but after the prolonged quality didn't interest me any more and would have received lower ratings than previously.

I suspect that some of the people who write on this forum drink fabulous wine and would laugh at the high points a peasant like me might give an average $50 bottle of wine.

The price of a wine should not come into the equation except as an indicator unless you're writing a book for the masses and think that its relevant. Its up to you how much you want to spend on a wine and if you see that Halliday has given it 95 points and it only costs $20, then that may be the reason you buy it.....

As for ethereal surely there is an element of location, company, food that may not be easily replicated and relevant to points. I had part of a bottle of 1996 wendouree shiraz once when I was depressed and by myself and didn't enjoy it at all (the next night I finished it with my wife and thought it was fabulous).

pedantically yours

Luke

[Polymer]

Price should have nothing to do with a points score...

I understand what you're trying to do but it doesn't work right if you do it that way because everyone values things differently...

Point scores are already a sticky subject but if you're trying to put an objective score to something (as much you can with something so subjective like wine) you are trying to score how good a wine is (and of course everyone will score it differently but they should be trying to score a wine based on the wine). If someone wants to use your point scale to determine if they will like the wine they can and they'll use their own value judgment to determine if it's one they want to buy.

To me it's not supposed to be the higher the points the more you should be inclined to buy it because it incorporates a value judgment in there as well....

What makes points even more iffy is that a lot of people do exactly what you're proposing...

[Adair]

1. Quality of the wine - color / nose / taste / aftertaste
2. A rating on the ethereal experience of the wine
3. Value for money
4. How close it goes to being an ultimate wine experience

Yes, I agree points are important. I wish Ian would use points, but his notes are so great I am not to make a point of it!

Simply, points provide an “easier to use” context of, and comparative between, tasting notes of a particular taster, especially when the notes are of wines in a similar style.

I don't think points are pretentious... unless they are being used to be pretentious!!!

As mentioned above by others, forget the "value for money". Let the purchaser work out what they want to buy based upon your notes and points. You will incorporate a complexity that will make your point score useless if you include value for money. Make this a separate comment or score.

I love your “ethereal experience of the wine” and “How close it goes to being an ultimate wine experience” criteria. I would stick with these and point 1.

And, FWIW, I don't worry about colour anymore.

Kind regards,
Adair

[griff]

What if the writer doesn't think in point-form?

cheers

Carl

[Adair]

What if the writer doesn't think in point-form?

cheers

Carl

No issues
And if you are thinking in a manner like TORB with Recommended, Highly Recommended, Excellent, etc...this is a form of points anyway.

[Waiters Friend]

G'day

I think we would be hard pressed to enforce a points scoring regime on any forum. If people want to do it, that is fine, but like wine writers, you would have to calibrate your palate to that of the forumites (and they would all be different) in order to make the points score meaningful to you.

I agree wholeheartedly about Ian's tasting notes ( I wish I could reel them off like that), and for me, I'd rather read Ian's notes without numbers - I suspect a relative score using numbers would diminish what Ian is getting across.

We use a lot of descriptors which can also be subjective, but possibly less so than the points system. I admit that I am more likely to read a post by certain forumites because I respect their opinion, and recognise that they see some wines in a similar way to me. These posts then 'speak' to me more. Adding a points system might enhance it, but also might detract from what I gain from the descriptors.

A long answer, perhaps? For me, it's not a necessity to have points.

Allan

[monghead]

Hi all, I am a fan of points, or some sort of rating system. It allows for palate calibration, and less ambiguity. Of course the setting and company with which we taste/drink wine affects this "score", but isn't that the point? After all, wine is a complex, living beast, and it should be part of the rich tapestry that is our lives, not segregated to a sterile tasting room. Thus, I am a big fan of tasting notes and scores that reflect how the wine engaged the taster's emotions.

For the record, the monghead rating system is:

Wine ratings

Not Good- Won't touch again, unless nothing else available, and the water was polluted (unless faulty, then will give it another chance)

Sub Good- Will drink it if available, but will certainly not seek it out.
Just Good- Will buy some if the price is very good, as a quaffer.
Good- On par, aim for this as the day-to-day drink/quaffer, if pricing reasonable.
Solid Good- Liked most aspects of it, but not exciting.
Good Good- Some aspect of the wine gets me excited, but others may just be on par.
Very Good- Ticks all the boxes, leaves me wanting more.
Very Very Good- Could not fault any aspect. Usually with a facet being exceptional.
Extremely Good- Just shy of perfection.
Uncontrollably Good / Out of Control Good- The complete package. Everything in perfect harmony, a sheer pleasure to drink.
OMG Strap me Down Good- Beyond perfection.The stuff that takes my breath away, leaving me speechless. The stuff that haunts me.....

Cheers,

Monghead.

[Roscoe]

What if the writer doesn't think in point-form?

cheers

Carl

No issues
And if you are thinking in a manner like TORB with Recommended, Highly Recommended, Excellent, etc...this is a form of points anyway.

The beauty of using such a method of "scoring" is that it attaches what looks like a subjective rating to a subjective process. Using points is attaching what looks like an objective score to a subjective process. As long as everyone treats it as a purely subjective assessment with large fudge factors in the final number, that's ok. I suspect however most people would prefer to buy a 90 point wine rather than a 89 point wine despite the fact there is a good chance there is no real difference in quality.
I fully understand why points are used and why they always will be. I think we pay more attention to them and give them more credence than we should, and that includes me.

[Rawshack]

Points scoring, IMO, is flawed for three reasons

1 - there is no established standard for 100 point scoring, yet there is a perceived assumption from consumers that there is
2 - scores are a false indicator of quality; the Gourmet Wine Traveller has it's ratings as follows: 78-84 - 'a very good wine of it's type', yet not one of the wines they feature gets a scoring in this bracket; the lowest score (in the APR/MAY 10 copy) is 85 (an extremely Good Wine) thus making their scoring system null and void
3 - We as a society seem obsessed with making consumerism, and indeed life, simple, easy sterile. Wine to me - the film and music I love, is a beautiful, living, majestic thing; and some examples of said three items can take love, passion, time and effort to create, yet we want to sample and say '90 points. Next'

B*llocks to points scoring, it's nonsense. Let us love wine and rejoice it's sheer unadulterated joy.

God, you can tell I haven't had a drink for a while

[Gianna]

Not sure if this makes, but I think just about every post makes sense.

Therefore, I decree that everyone can once again do as they see fit -

"To score or not to score" - Ahh, that is a question.

I do like mongheads word rating system too, perhaps I might score wines with a double rating system.

EG: tasting notes explained then - 94ts - Really Good - will search for it again at every chance.

Tis such an evocative topic wine..It's why we all love it I suppose.

[Craig(NZ)]

Although I am well aware that the 109 point system is the worlds greatest wine scoring system, the fact remains I have retired so I don't score wines

[Adair]

Although I am well aware that the 109 point system is the worlds greatest wine scoring system, the fact remains I have retired so I don't score wines

The only good thing about you retiring is I see less of wines being marked out of bloody 109 points!!!

[Craig(NZ)]

The only good thing about you retiring is I see less of wines being marked out of bloody 109 points!!!

yeah but only until someone realises i never patented the concept. I predict Robert Parker will soon move there

[Michael McNally]

Using points is attaching what looks like an objective score to a subjective process.

What he said. Assigning points to a wine is either
1 just a slightly more considered stab at finding a point between Very, Very Good and Excellent (which are side by side on my rating scale), or
2 an attempt to seem scientific in a subjective exercise.

The first is fine. The second is for the "experts" and even then should be considered the first.

Cheers

Michael

[dave vino]

So how would wine shows run if there were no point scoring?

[Adair]

Points scoring, IMO, is flawed for three reasons: 1,2,3

regarding 1 & 2, points can only be relative to points given by the same person or panel, or different people who have attempted to calibrate their palates and point scores.

Regarding 3 - if you feel rating wine with points takes away from your wine experience, no issues, don't do it. If you feel the same about writing about wine, fine, don't do it. If you want to share your wne experience with others by way of writing a note and/or giving a score, then do it. If so, you might find it easier to say "I give wine A, B and C, 96, 95, 94" than "I liked wine A a liitle better than wine B and wine B a little better than wine C but all were great wines."

[Adair]

Using points is attaching what looks like an objective score to a subjective process.

If a reader of a wine point score thinks the score is an objective mark, it is the reader's problem, with the reader unlikely to know much about wine.

I don't spend much time caring about these bad outcomes of using wine point scores, and I don't think that there are many people on wine forums like this that are going to mistake wine scores as objective assessments.

I know that retailers use wine scores in this way, but I don't care if some people buy wines this way either. Most of my wine novice friends buy wine based on the look of the label! I don't feel the need to protect or educate them. They don't care.

[Roscoe]

I don't spend much time caring about these bad outcomes of using wine point scores, and I don't think that there are many people on wine forums like this that are going to mistake wine scores as objective assessments.

Hi Adair
I sincerely wish that you are right. Unfortunately we humans seem to have a dichotomy between knowing and doing. We all know that smoking is bad and exercise is good but how many of us ignore this? Despite the fact that we may know that a mark is a subjective rating we tend to feel instinctively that it is objective. I do. (Maybe it's just me.) Most of us are not as rational as we think we are and there is a lot of evidence to support that. Your example of your novice wine friends choosing the nicest label is a great example because even using points is more rational than that. I don't actually believe they don't care at all how the wine tastes, but if they don't - another example of man's irrationality!
Many (maybe most) educated drinkers know that points are a subjective appraisal but how many have not used points at some stage to choose a wine, especially when there is no option to taste it first. This of course may produce no real harm, but I'm not entirely convinced that RPJ et al from the Wine Advocate have produced no harm. I suspect that we (but not they) would be better off if they used a subjective rating system. Large numbers of small, seemingly inconsequential decisions can add up to large consequences.
I don't see any real harm from Australian wine raters, but that is not to say it couldn't happen.
As I said, I understand why it is done and why it will not stop. I just think it is fundamentally wrong.
In essence though you are completely right - there is a hell of a lot of stuff out there in the world that causes more harm than wine scores!
Cheers

[Bick]

B*llocks to points scoring, it's nonsense.

What he said

So how would wine shows run if there were no point scoring?

I realise you may have been being ironic, but in answer... perfectly well I should think. County fairs seem to cope with deciding which vegetables win the rosette each year without having to give them 96 points or whatever.

[orpheus]

100 point system for carrots (and for all) in County Fairs!

The County Fair system is simply not finely callibrated enough at the moment, as far as I am concerned.

[Adair]

I don't spend much time caring about these bad outcomes of using wine point scores, and I don't think that there are many people on wine forums like this that are going to mistake wine scores as objective assessments.

Hi Adair
I sincerely wish that you are right. Unfortunately we humans seem to have a dichotomy between knowing and doing. We all know that smoking is bad and exercise is good but how many of us ignore this? Despite the fact that we may know that a mark is a subjective rating we tend to feel instinctively that it is objective. I do. (Maybe it's just me.) Most of us are not as rational as we think we are and there is a lot of evidence to support that. Your example of your novice wine friends choosing the nicest label is a great example because even using points is more rational than that. I don't actually believe they don't care at all how the wine tastes, but if they don't - another example of man's irrationality!
Many (maybe most) educated drinkers know that points are a subjective appraisal but how many have not used points at some stage to choose a wine, especially when there is no option to taste it first. This of course may produce no real harm, but I'm not entirely convinced that RPJ et al from the Wine Advocate have produced no harm. I suspect that we (but not they) would be better off if they used a subjective rating system. Large numbers of small, seemingly inconsequential decisions can add up to large consequences.
I don't see any real harm from Australian wine raters, but that is not to say it couldn't happen.
As I said, I understand why it is done and why it will not stop. I just think it is fundamentally wrong.
In essence though you are completely right - there is a hell of a lot of stuff out there in the world that causes more harm than wine scores!
Cheers

* But Roscoe, I would rather buy a wine that a wine reviewer has scored highly than a wine that no reviewer has scored and I have not tasted. I will then be able to work out quickly whether my palate agrees with the reviewer, and decide whether to trust that reviewer's score. In the medium and long term, this will save me money.
* And from the reviewer's viewpoint, the reviewer tries their best to do this well, or then no one would read their reviews and point scores, and then no one will pay for their subscriptions.
* Whatever negatives Parker has done, and please be aware that I think Parker has very little idea about Australian wine or at least Australian wine for my palate (I now avoid highly rated Parker wines), I definitely use his reviews and scores on Bordeaux as for my palate he is much better with this style for my palate. I look at his scores because I have calibrated my palate with his in this certain style, which is the same that I have done with JO, JH, HH, CM and GW in other styles.
* In summary, I think point scores can be of great help and although I concede their are negatives, I believe these are relatively small.

Just my views anyway,
Adair

[Roscoe]

Just my views anyway,
Adair

Et vive la difference!
I think that all the uses you ascribe to points can equally be achieved by subjective rating systems without as many disadvantages. I would also venture that palate calibration is an easier task with subjective rating systems.
Subjective ratings are however, not as marketable or as easily communicable (although I think the latter is illusory). This is all important these days. These are the biggest disadvantages of subjective ratings and why scores will never die.
C'est la vie.
cheers

[Rawshack]

Points scoring, IMO, is flawed for three reasons: 1,2,3

regarding 1 & 2, points can only be relative to points given by the same person or panel, or different people who have attempted to calibrate their palates and point scores.

Regarding 3 - if you feel rating wine with points takes away from your wine experience, no issues, don't do it. If you feel the same about writing about wine, fine, don't do it. If you want to share your wne experience with others by way of writing a note and/or giving a score, then do it. If so, you might find it easier to say "I give wine A, B and C, 96, 95, 94" than "I liked wine A a liitle better than wine B and wine B a little better than wine C but all were great wines."

I don't do it, and I don't want other people to do it either. Let's try thinking for a change rather than relying on 2 b*llshit figures someone has pulled out the ether.

People that rely on scores are essentially relying on infant arithmetic to base an opinion. And yes, this extends beyond the world of wine. The world keeps on getting dumber.

[Adair]

I don't do it, and I don't want other people to do it either.

Hahaha! Have politically extreme views as well?!

[Rawshack]

I don't do it, and I don't want other people to do it either.

Hahaha! Have politically extreme views as well?!

Nah, I'm just still cranky and missing drink

I am going to get severely caned on Wednesday night

[Adair]

I don't do it, and I don't want other people to do it either.

Hahaha! Have politically extreme views as well?!

Nah, I'm just still cranky and missing drink

I am going to get severely caned on Wednesday night

Actually, you are in a similar position as me. I found that I lost a filling on Saturday, and I have not had a wine since. I have made an appointment with the dentist on Wednesday, so Wednesday night will be a break of a dry spell for me as well. I assure you I will be drinking 90+ point wines!

[Rawshack]

Actually, you are in a similar position as me. I found that I lost a filling on Saturday, and I have not had a wine since. I have made an appointment with the dentist on Wednesday, so Wednesday night will be a break of a dry spell for me as well. I assure you I will be drinking 90+ point wines!

Ha ha

I will be drinking VERY GOOD to EXCELLENT wines and I will probably be in a LESS THAN JAKE state on Thursday morning

[Bick]

The County Fair system is simply not finely callibrated enough at the moment, as far as I am concerned.

Indeed. County fair conversation after the point-scoring revolution:
"I like his scoring, he shares my palate for beets"
"Yes, but he scores brassicas far too highly - has he ever given a cabbage less than 93?"