The Auswine Forum

To follow on from a previous thread and to satisfy my curiosity.

I have added a geographic skew on the data out of curiosity, although it won't mean anything considering the pre-dominence of Australians on this website.

I think everyone at one point of time, would have bought a wine (even to try) based on the medals that it has won at shows. Especially if these medals are from major capital cities.

Personally, I would rather try a wine that has received a 95 point plus rating from Halliday than a wine that has won a few gold medals.

cheers
anthony

Both as a customer, and as a retailer, if a wine has won

Good medals eg capital city shows

Medals at a range of differing shows

preferably a gong also at the national Wine Show

Then I would be tempted to buy it, and also tempted to look at it with my retailer's hat on.

The National Wine Show as it has to have already won medals to be entered, I think, plus all wines must be bottled and labelled and commercially available, no barrel samples.

Capital city shows as they're the most widely represented and strongest.

If it won red wine medals in Adelaide I take notice, very tough class this.

Used to buy wine with medals won in my earlier days of wine tasting. As my knowledge increase and my palate set in. I don't buy wines based on the medals won. I certainly will have a look, but that's about it.

I voted no because I want to taste them. Sure the capital city shows and especially Canberra have some credibility and multiple medals from these shows means a good chance its a good wine. Likewise a 95 from Halliday should also mean its credible but, just because a wine is good in theory doesn't mean I am going to like it. Classic example was th 99 Saltram No 1, more medals than a Patton but I flat out didn't like it.

So unless someone like Brian says I will love it, or I see TN's here from people I respect and whose palates I understand I wont buy without trying. And leaves you out Dr Ahnoose as you you would probably hang us out to dry with false promises.

Torb, the poll does not exclude people who you buy to try based on Medals at shows. If you buy wines to try based on medals then you infact DO BUY WINES BASED ON MEDALS

I think we need to refine the question. Are we talking about buying because of a medal with no intention of trying it?

Does this poll include the single bottle purchased because of a medal and used for your own assessment on whether it is any good?

cheers
anthony

Anthony wrote:I think we need to refine the question. Are we talking about buying because of a medal with no intention of trying it?

Does this poll include the single bottle purchased because of a medal and used for your own assessment on whether it is any good?

cheers
anthony

I'm with Anthony, I'll often buy a bottle to try if it has medals from some major shows, will only buy untasted in quantity if it's a wine I know well from lengthy experience and/or have some other confirmation I trust of the vintage quality for that wine.

I voted no, but I'm thinking this is not strictly true. If I am interested in a bottle already and it has medals down the side, I always have a closer look to see where they are from, and quickly shelve it if the medals are 'best barbeque red at the junction box manufacturers ball.' Wouldn't buy more than one until proven worthy, and all that glitters is not all told.

cheers,

Voted no but certain awards will sometimes try toget to taste and or buy. 2 championship wines come to mind 84 Seppelt Riesling and 85 Seppelt SR spk shiraz. The trophy I think is most intesting is the Sydney Show champion of champions - usually I don't have the money or opportunity to try these those.

DJ

Yes, I buy wines that have won medals at wines. For example, I get the full results from, say the McLaren vale Show, and study them, and generally buy the high scorers. I feel that when most of the wines from an area are tasted together, there is good competition, and the better wines come out on top.
This would be different when there is a mix of wines from different areas.
I have rarely been let down with this policy

A few no voters seem to have resiled, with qualifications, from their original positions. I'm sure that all of us have bought and do buy the occasional bottle of wine based on show results, even if the only shows that count for most of us are capital city shows and the National. Even the capital city show results though, with their plethora of classes that differ from city to city can be misleading. I agree that some regional shows provide a guide to better wines produced there but it seems that most regional shows don't limit eligibility to only wines produced in those particular regions. There are also so many shows around the world that the larger companies with considerable export volumes enter any and every show there is, get a bronze or a silver here or there and plaster each and every award on the labels of their wines. Has anyone had a look (through a magnifying glass, if not a microscope) at some of the Jacob's Creek labels recently?

Another trend I find disturbing is the increasingly common practice of wineries pasting industry awards on the labels of all of their wines, usually gold in colour. "Winery of the Year", "Most Successful Exhibitor" etc, etc has no relevance to the wine in the bottle whatsoever, that particular wine most likely not having even been included in the portfolio that gained the award. A marketing ploy designed to suck in the punters that I reckon verges on false and misleading advertising.

I voted "Yes"; but as with other respondents to this question, show awards are not the sole reason I choose to buy a wine. For example, I tasted Rosemount's Traditional 01 JWT winner, thought it a good wine, if something of a crowd-pleaser, but didn't buy as there are other wines I'd rather spend the money on.

daz

Hmm, that was me. Was sure I'd logged in

daz

Anonymous wrote:A few no voters seem to have resiled, with qualifications, from their original positions. I'm sure that all of us have bought and do buy the occasional bottle of wine based on show results, even if the only shows that count for most of us are capital city shows and the National. Even the capital city show results though, with their plethora of classes that differ from city to city can be misleading. I agree that some regional shows provide a guide to better wines produced there but it seems that most regional shows don't limit eligibility to only wines produced in those particular regions. There are also so many shows around the world that the larger companies with considerable export volumes enter any and every show there is, get a bronze or a silver here or there and plaster each and every award on the labels of their wines. Has anyone had a look (through a magnifying glass, if not a microscope) at some of the Jacob's Creek labels recently?

Another trend I find disturbing is the increasingly common practice of wineries pasting industry awards on the labels of all of their wines, usually gold in colour. "Winery of the Year", "Most Successful Exhibitor" etc, etc has no relevance to the wine in the bottle whatsoever, that particular wine most likely not having even been included in the portfolio that gained the award. A marketing ploy designed to suck in the punters that I reckon verges on false and misleading advertising.

I voted "Yes"; but as with other respondents to this question, show awards are not the sole reason I choose to buy a wine. For example, I tasted Rosemount's Traditional 01 JWT winner, thought it a good wine, if something of a crowd-pleaser, but didn't buy as there are other wines I'd rather spend the money on.

daz

hey Daz,

do you have a list of what the class numbers mean, or is there a site/s I can refer to? Always wanted to know but never cared enough to find out.

I bought a couple of bottles of the Traditional after a tasting, and then when I got to them at home, found it wasn't nearly as good as I had previously thought. This was something I noticed in France: the wine always tasted better in the vineyard cellar.

All the best,