When you pick up a bottle of wine at a store, the rating is frequently prominently displayed as a number, i.e. 91 points, from James Suckling. What does this really mean?
Wine ratings of this type are uniquely American (more on that in another article). I walked into a winery one day (it happens!) to find them shipping two cases to a wine magazine for a rating. So, only the wineries who are willing to give their product away get a rating. Make your own judgement on the ethics of that. Contrast that with Consumer Reports which refuses to accept donated items.
Back to wine ratings. The scale is nominally 0-100, but in practice, the only wines that you’re likely to see have scores in the 85-100 range and 85 might not be very drinkable. Vinegar might qualify for a score of 50 which makes little sense.
This scale was popularized by Robert Parker in his newsletter called Wine Advocate and Wine Spectator magazine which started in the 1980’s. Parker’s taste was for full-bodied, oaky wines made principally of Cabernet Sauvignon so naturally many wine makers in the USA moved their wine growing and making style in order to score higher on the Parker scale, bringing marketing advantages, along with higher pricing. It’s important to note something which is rarely emphasized, namely that scores do not represent the important facts about the wine. Those are in the tasting notes.
Can you really tell the difference between a 90 and 92 point wine? I doubt it but you’ll probably pay more for the 92 point bottle. Can you really compare a French Medoc with a Napa Cab? Yes, both are mainly Cabernet Sauvignon but they are likely to be rather different wines, grown in different soils and climates. So, read the tasting notes. If you want a sipping wine, buy that. If you want a wine which pairs well with grilled red meat, look for a food friendly wine. But don’t rely on the ratings.
Cheers!
-Submitted by Guy Gimson
(Image credits: Pixabay.com and Vinepair.com)