The Auswine Forum

Chuck wrote:Just a thought. Is it possible that wines are just getting better compared to decades ago (the whole process from growing making to storage) and JH rates them on a consistent basis and in fact there could be 101 point wines out there ie marginally better than a 100 point wine of say 30 years ago?

Errr
No I don’t think so
Perspective transcends years

The reviewers need some reality

From the 1990 edition of James Halliday’s Australian Wine Guide:

1986 Lindemans Bin 7210 – 86 points
1984 Penfolds Grange – 90 points
1987 Penfolds St Henri – 80 points
1986 Penfolds Bin 128 – 80 points
1986 Orlando St Hugo – 88 points

Chuck wrote:Just a thought. Is it possible that wines are just getting better compared to decades ago (the whole process from growing making to storage) and JH rates them on a consistent basis and in fact there could be 101 point wines out there ie marginally better than a 100 point wine of say 30 years ago?

Up to and including 2016, Halliday had just 5 table wines rated 99 points in total. Fast forward 2 years and there's like 3x that amount this year alone. Surely the industry can't have matured that quickly?

Call me cynical but the change of ownership structure for the Halliday empire in the intervening period may very well have played a role...

Chuck wrote:Just a thought. Is it possible that wines are just getting better compared to decades ago (the whole process from growing making to storage) and JH rates them on a consistent basis and in fact there could be 101 point wines out there ie marginally better than a 100 point wine of say 30 years ago?

There are arguments for this, though history is littered with 'progress' that ends up being a retrograde step to quality, enjoyment and the environment. From trellising to clonal selection, to winemaking techniques, sometimes modernisation has made plenty of wines more enjoyable, and sometimes it's turned out to be the opposite. Fashion is arguably a bigger influence, not least in Australia in recent years, where many are driving towards lower alcohol levels and ditching some of the 'bigger/more intense is better' approaches.

An easier answer lies in the bottle shop 'shelf talkers' emblazoned with a points score and if you're lucky, a snippet of a tasting note. So which score does the bottle shop choose, the one scoring the wine 94 points, or the one scoring it 96 points? Even if the former is a well-regarded critic and that score represents a very high score from them, the bottle shop will use the 96 point score. Next year the 94 point critic moves up to 96 points to try and get more coverage, but the 96 point critic moves up to 98 points to protect their place, and so it goes on. It's how people like James Suckling work the system. The wineries love it, as high scores look good and help demand. The bottle shops like it because those wines shift faster. Even some punters like it, at least when starting to get into wine, and trusting the critics to guide them. Getting a 98 point wine for less than 30 bucks can feel like a victory. In time many realise the folly of letting someone else dictate what they should like.

Ian S wrote:

Chuck wrote:Just a thought. Is it possible that wines are just getting better compared to decades ago (the whole process from growing making to storage) and JH rates them on a consistent basis and in fact there could be 101 point wines out there ie marginally better than a 100 point wine of say 30 years ago?

There are arguments for this, though history is littered with 'progress' that ends up being a retrograde step to quality, enjoyment and the environment. From trellising to clonal selection, to winemaking techniques, sometimes modernisation has made plenty of wines more enjoyable, and sometimes it's turned out to be the opposite. Fashion is arguably a bigger influence, not least in Australia in recent years, where many are driving towards lower alcohol levels and ditching some of the 'bigger/more intense is better' approaches.

An easier answer lies in the bottle shop 'shelf talkers' emblazoned with a points score and if you're lucky, a snippet of a tasting note. So which score does the bottle shop choose, the one scoring the wine 94 points, or the one scoring it 96 points? Even if the former is a well-regarded critic and that score represents a very high score from them, the bottle shop will use the 96 point score. Next year the 94 point critic moves up to 96 points to try and get more coverage, but the 96 point critic moves up to 98 points to protect their place, and so it goes on. It's how people like James Suckling work the system. The wineries love it, as high scores look good and help demand. The bottle shops like it because those wines shift faster. Even some punters like it, at least when starting to get into wine, and trusting the critics to guide them. Getting a 98 point wine for less than 30 bucks can feel like a victory. In time many realise the folly of letting someone else dictate what they should like.

Spot on.

Ozzie W wrote:From the 1990 edition of James Halliday’s Australian Wine Guide:

1986 Lindemans Bin 7210 – 86 points
1984 Penfolds Grange – 90 points
1987 Penfolds St Henri – 80 points
1986 Penfolds Bin 128 – 80 points
1986 Orlando St Hugo – 88 points

Wow. I had no idea the mid 80s were such poor vintages. Anti - vintages of the century?

Ian S wrote: Getting a 98 point wine for less than 30 bucks can feel like a victory. In time many realise the folly of letting someone else dictate what they should like.

This, but I would modify it thus.

Getting a 98 point wine can feel like a victory but in time most realise the folly of letting someone else dictate what they should like.

Great conversation. I think the jury is in. I just wonder how JH would rate the 84 Grange now?

Believe it or not there are some lesser known OZ wine critics (for good reason) whose scores are even higher than JH if that's at all possible. I think they just love the limelight and free wine. I'll stick to the more credible critics and sites like Cellar Tracker for guides to quality.

Chuck wrote:Great conversation. I think the jury is in. I just wonder how JH would rate the 84 Grange now?

Believe it or not there are some lesser known OZ wine critics (for good reason) whose scores are even higher than JH if that's at all possible. I think they just love the limelight and free wine. I'll stick to the more credible critics and sites like Cellar Tracker for guides to quality.

I think they all love the lime light and the free wine....there even used to be someone here who is now a 'critic' who proudly showed off the thousands of empties out the back. Guess if they had to buy the wines, they would not review.

I have said it before we should have an Auswine critics panel ...we actually buy wine, we drink it, we drink it with food more importantly.

Short of that perhaps a panel of judges at the national show are better placed...however, 250 one year old Shiraz class leads to olfactory adaptation and palate fatigue, when then leads to very subjective assessment to the point the same wine in a given year can have half a dozen different scores...a gold at one show and nothing at the next??

Cheers Craig

I think its reasonable to take the Halliday ratings with a grain of salt. Ultimately it comes down to the question of whether you like the wine - not what somebody else thinks of it.

That said, as someone who is relatively new to wine, the book has introduced me to dozens of wines that I otherwise would not have tasted. As someone who literally knew nothing about wine other than that I enjoyed the "good stuff" that I tried at my godfather's house - it has been a good resource to find out what is out there and then go and try it for myself.

As you all well know, there are many wineries that simply are not accessible if buying off the shelf in a retail store is your only exposure to wine. The book has been a good starting point for me to then go and look up a winery's website, check out the community scores on cellar tracker and then order a mixed six pack to see if I actually like it.

The scores I have found to be a useful as a general guide particularly when using the online database which allows you to filter by price and "quality." I live in Brisbane, I work full time and I am starting a young family. I simply don't have the time or money, as much as I would like to go to tastings and do winery tours of the Barossa Valley. Without that book, my wine experience would still be limited to Jim Barry Cover Drive and Oyster Bay Sav Blanc depending on whether I felt like a white or red. If I was really adventurous I would place an order with a local Qld winery only because it was the only cellar door I had been to. Now I have some confidence in ordering wines from new wineries that I have not tried from all over Australia.

Chuck wrote:Great conversation. I think the jury is in. I just wonder how JH would rate the 84 Grange now?

This is the trouble with many, many wine critics. Grange being a bad example for Halliday as he's a Grange drinker, but they are often guessing on longevity and improvement , with little experience with a wine's lineage in a maturation window. With an Australian winery opening every week, sure, there's guesswork with wines without cellaring history.

Being a little more specialized in drinking these days, the best critics are long time drinkers who make a decision on a wine over a number of experiences. In addition to the winemakers, who are far more honest ( barring extreme examples ) than the critics!

I subscribe to the winefront and use internet searches to build a picture of an untried Aussie wine. I find I can ignore the points with WF, which I believe are high too though with understanding, and get a yarn about a wine and pretty much match the commentators note with my preferences or interest.

phillisc wrote:I have said it before we should have an Auswine critics panel ...we actually buy wine, we drink it, we drink it with food more importantly.

Cheers Craig

We do Craig. It's called the Auswine Forum. Plenty of people on here whose reviews I read and whose recommendations I sometimes try.

It was through this forum that I got onto wines like Marius, Wild Duck Creek Estate, Noon and Wynns.

Not enough folk on here drink or post on Grenache so I have to stay subscribed to Winefront for that....

Cheers

Michael

Rocky wrote:

Ozzie W wrote:From the 1990 edition of James Halliday’s Australian Wine Guide:

1986 Lindemans Bin 7210 – 86 points
1984 Penfolds Grange – 90 points
1987 Penfolds St Henri – 80 points
1986 Penfolds Bin 128 – 80 points
1986 Orlando St Hugo – 88 points

Wow. I had no idea the mid 80s were such poor vintages. Anti - vintages of the century?

1986 was a great vintage in South Australia. 1984 and 1987 were OK vintages. To me, those scores just highlight the points creep that's occurred over the past decade, which was the point of my post, no pun intended.

Can you imagine Halliday scoring any wine 80 points today?

Ozzie W wrote:

Rocky wrote:

Ozzie W wrote:From the 1990 edition of James Halliday’s Australian Wine Guide:

1986 Lindemans Bin 7210 – 86 points
1984 Penfolds Grange – 90 points
1987 Penfolds St Henri – 80 points
1986 Penfolds Bin 128 – 80 points
1986 Orlando St Hugo – 88 points

Wow. I had no idea the mid 80s were such poor vintages. Anti - vintages of the century?

1986 was a great vintage in South Australia. 1984 and 1987 were OK vintages. To me, those scores just highlight the points creep that's occurred over the past decade, which was the point of my post, no pun intended.

Can you imagine Halliday scoring any wine 80 points today?

80 points wouldnt be in the book
I recall in his old books he would give 79 points etc

Michael McNally wrote:

phillisc wrote:I have said it before we should have an Auswine critics panel ...we actually buy wine, we drink it, we drink it with food more importantly.

Cheers Craig

We do Craig. It's called the Auswine Forum. Plenty of people on here whose reviews I read and whose recommendations I sometimes try.

It was through this forum that I got onto wines like Marius, Wild Duck Creek Estate, Noon and Wynns.

Not enough folk on here drink or post on Grenache so I have to stay subscribed to Winefront for that....

Cheers

Michael

Cheers Craig
PS Michael, Rockford Dry Country is the only Grenache that i have in the cellar

tuxy85 wrote:I think its reasonable to take the Halliday ratings with a grain of salt. Ultimately it comes down to the question of whether you like the wine - not what somebody else thinks of it.

That said, as someone who is relatively new to wine, the book has introduced me to dozens of wines that I otherwise would not have tasted. As someone who literally knew nothing about wine other than that I enjoyed the "good stuff" that I tried at my godfather's house - it has been a good resource to find out what is out there and then go and try it for myself.

As you all well know, there are many wineries that simply are not accessible if buying off the shelf in a retail store is your only exposure to wine. The book has been a good starting point for me to then go and look up a winery's website, check out the community scores on cellar tracker and then order a mixed six pack to see if I actually like it.

The scores I have found to be a useful as a general guide particularly when using the online database which allows you to filter by price and "quality." I live in Brisbane, I work full time and I am starting a young family. I simply don't have the time or money, as much as I would like to go to tastings and do winery tours of the Barossa Valley. Without that book, my wine experience would still be limited to Jim Barry Cover Drive and Oyster Bay Sav Blanc depending on whether I felt like a white or red. If I was really adventurous I would place an order with a local Qld winery only because it was the only cellar door I had been to. Now I have some confidence in ordering wines from new wineries that I have not tried from all over Australia.

Great post. I'm sure many Australian wine drinkers started out like this.