Following up on wine scoring
I’ve mentioned recently that I really don’t get into the scoring of wines, and don’t catalog my own cellar (or personal tasting notes) with numeric values.
Generally, I have 3 categories when I taste: ones I like (this is based on flavor, value & quality) and would/will buy; wines I find acceptable, but either are over priced or don’t have the bang-for-the-buck that I’d like to see; and lastly, those wines which I find simply fail either the flavor, value or quality tests. It's all subjective, and I feel it loses (at least some) meaning when exported to another person with a different palate & different experience.
Having said that, I do look to Dan Berger for reviews because I’ve found that his tastes jibe somewhat with my own, and also to a little book called California Wine Winners.
California Wine Winners is a yearly publication of the results for 9 major West Coast competitions, broken down by appellation, producer, and varietal (as well as Bordeaux & Rhone type blends). Lists are tabulated by number of medals awarded, and are weighted by what those medals were (double gold + special medals = 7 pts, gold = 5, silver = 3, bronze = 1). It’s quite handy, and has contact information for wineries in the back of the book, as well as a section for inexpensive golds (wines winning at least 1 gold medal and priced at $11/btl or less). It’s worth a look if you haven’t found it on your own yet.
Why do I find it useful? I think it’s superior to a single critic in that these results are gathered from 9 different competitions where the wines were judged against each other. Therefore, they should more closely represent what the general public would think since these wines have several different results evaluated simultaneously.
California Wine Winners 2005, 22nd annual edition ($10.75 @ Barnes& Noble), published by Varietal Fair, P.O. Box 73431, Richmond, VA 23235-8041
Cheers!
Generally, I have 3 categories when I taste: ones I like (this is based on flavor, value & quality) and would/will buy; wines I find acceptable, but either are over priced or don’t have the bang-for-the-buck that I’d like to see; and lastly, those wines which I find simply fail either the flavor, value or quality tests. It's all subjective, and I feel it loses (at least some) meaning when exported to another person with a different palate & different experience.
Having said that, I do look to Dan Berger for reviews because I’ve found that his tastes jibe somewhat with my own, and also to a little book called California Wine Winners.
California Wine Winners is a yearly publication of the results for 9 major West Coast competitions, broken down by appellation, producer, and varietal (as well as Bordeaux & Rhone type blends). Lists are tabulated by number of medals awarded, and are weighted by what those medals were (double gold + special medals = 7 pts, gold = 5, silver = 3, bronze = 1). It’s quite handy, and has contact information for wineries in the back of the book, as well as a section for inexpensive golds (wines winning at least 1 gold medal and priced at $11/btl or less). It’s worth a look if you haven’t found it on your own yet.
Why do I find it useful? I think it’s superior to a single critic in that these results are gathered from 9 different competitions where the wines were judged against each other. Therefore, they should more closely represent what the general public would think since these wines have several different results evaluated simultaneously.
California Wine Winners 2005, 22nd annual edition ($10.75 @ Barnes& Noble), published by Varietal Fair, P.O. Box 73431, Richmond, VA 23235-8041
Cheers!
posted by Anonymous at 11:37 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home