|
How Magazines Rate Wines Paul Franson This article is the original version of one
prepared for Wine Business Monthly,
but it was so long the magazine only included part. Few subjects receive more attention from
winemakers and wine marketers than the ratings given by various publications.
To clarify the subject, we’ve collected the comments about their systems from
the publications themselves. The following are verbatim except for minor
editing from the statements of the publications. Connoisseurs'
Guide to California Wines Connoisseurs'
Guide to California Wine bases its rating system on the premise that all
wines are to be tasted blind at our tasting tables and against their
peers. We limit our daily tasting regimen to 16 or 20 wines, and we devote
about eight to ten minutes to each wine, including discussion and retasting
before revealing the labels of the wines being evaluated. Wines
are sampled by a panel of four to six industry members, including
both Editor Charles Olken and Associate Editor Stephen
Eliot, who record their comments and preference order rankings on an
extensive tasting sheet of our own design. Our intent is to elicit comments,
not scores, from our panels. We then discuss each wine in order to learn as
much as possible about the wine in order to be able to write a tasting note and
assign a quality rating that will accurately reflect what our readers will find
when they pull the cork on any wine we have reviewed. We
do extensive retasting of wines as a matter of policy, and have done so since
the very beginnings of Connoisseurs' Guide some thirty years ago. Every
wine that is considered for our top rankings, every wine that has shown poorly
and every wine for which our tasting panels have had a mixed reaction either as
to quality or as to description is retasted. It
is our continuing policy that we buy the wines we review, but we do ask the
wineries to provide the retasting wines, at our expense in accordance with
their own policies regarding the provision of samples to winewriters, in order
that the retaste wines can be from fresh stock and therefore all be on a level
playing field. Wines
are scored in two ways by Connoisseurs' Guide. Our primary rating system
consists of five levels of quality. We use a THREE STAR system (somehow called
"puffs" within the industry) plus a rating of NO STARS for most
wines and the assignment of a DOWNTURNED GLASS for the very few
unpleasant or spoiled bottlings (tasted at lease twice) we
encounter. And, because the 100-point system of scoring has become an
industry standard, we now add scores based on that system for all wines. Wines that
earn our coveted Three-Star award, about 1 percent of all wines tasted in
most years, can score between 95 and 98 points. Wines at the Two Star
level score between 91 and 94 points, while One-Star wines get scores between
87 and 90 points. Wines awarded no stars are rated between 80 and 86
points, and all wines accorded a downturned glass are scored at 75 points. We
have intentionally avoided giving 100 point scores because it just does
not feel right to us. One has to believe that one is a perfect
taster having just tasted a perfect wine to score anything at 100 points.
Winetasting needs to be a little more humble than that in our opinion. It is a
small thing, but it is what we believe. No
magazine or writer has a perfect tasting methodology. We try to be as
rigorous as we can be, but, in the end, winetasting is subjective and that
is why we listen to other voices as well as our own before writing the descriptions
of the wines we review. Connoisseurs’
Guide Rating System *** Three stars 95-98 An exceptional wine. Worth a special search of
the market. ** Two stars 91-94
A highly distinctive wine. Likely to be memorable. * One star 87-90
Fine example of a type or style of wine. Without notable flaws. 80-86 Wines of varying
quality and value. See tasting notes for details. 70-79 Flawed wines to be
avoided. Note: Wines
not marked with stars are often delightful wines. Each has unique virtues and
any of these wines may be the best wine to serve your needs based on value,
availability or for your dining and taste preferences. Ship
two bottles of each sample together with Tech Sheet showing price, alcohol, TA,
pH, RS, production level, cepage and vinification information. Charles
Olken, 651 Tarryton Isle, Alameda, CA
94501, 510-865-3150 Decanter All Decanter
tastings are blind. Decanter tasting
panels are selected to create a balance between specialists, expert objective
tasters, MWs and experienced wine journalists. Tastings are carried out in a
controlled environment. No bottles are ever seen in the tasting room or at the
discussion afterward. Wines selected for Decanter
awards are retasted blind for confirmation of excellence. Decanter tastings are EU recognized. No tasting results are made
available pre-publication. ***** Decanter award Outstanding quality, a virtually perfect example **** Four-star wine Highly recommended *** Three-star wine Recommended ** Two-star wine Quite
good * One-star wine Acceptable New York Times The New York Times does not accept free wine. It
does rate wines by stars. New York Times Rating System **** Extraordinary
*** Excellent Ratings reflect the panel's reaction to the
wines, which are tasted with names and vintages concealed. While the number of
wines tasted will differ depending on the category, they will represent the
selection of wines that are generally available in good retail shops and restaurants.
Prices are those paid in wine shops in the New York region. Tasting Coordinator:
Bernard Kirsch. Quarterly Review
of Wines Quarterly Review
of Wines
does not rate wines or spirits numerically. San Francisco
Chronicle The San
Francisco Chronicle doesn’t assign numerical ratings to wines. The Chronicle evaluates wine on a tasting schedule that is emailed
quarterly to a list of organizations, wineries, distributors and PR
companies. Besides a cover letter
and the schedule (that includes tasting categories and submittal deadlines),
there is a wine submittal form for each wine submitted that is distributed via
email every 3 months. We are continually adding contacts to the
tasting schedule distribution. Interested parties can email me their complete contact
information (including the wineries they represent, in the case of PR
companies) with a request to be added to the tasting calendar distribution in
the body or subject line of the email. Lynne Char Bennett, Staff Writer/Wine
Coordinator. Email to wine@sfchronicle.com. Wall Street
Journal We do not accept free wine, free trips or
free meals. We attend only events that are open to the public. We do not meet
with winemakers when they visit New York. We buy all of our wines off retail
shelves unless specifically noted otherwise. We shop, both in person and
online, at retail stores all over the U.S., from Los Angeles to Chicago to
Tallahassee, Fla. We taste wines blind unless noted otherwise. Wines
are rated on a scale that ranges: Yech, OK, Good, Very Good, Delicious, and
Delicious! Wine Advocate We have a simple procedure for submitting
samples. First, the winery should contact us by phone (410-329-6477), fax
(410-357-4504), or e-mail (jopassman@aol.com) to find out Robert . Parker's
tasting schedule and when the samples should be sent. Only one bottle of each
wine should be submitted, along with retail price information. The address for
sample shipments is: Robert Parker, The Wine Advocate, 1002 Hillside View,
Parkton, MD 21120. We have a permit from the State of Maryland to legally
receive wine shipments, so that should not be a problem. Mr.
Parker tastes all wines sent, but there is no guarantee they will be reviewed
in The Wine Advocate as space limitations do not allow him to review all wines
tasted. Joan
Passman, Secretary, The Wine Advocate Rating system Robert Parker’s rating system employs a 50‑100
point quality scale. It is my belief that the various twenty (20) point rating
systems do not provide enough flexibility and often result in compressed and
inflated wine ratings. The Wine Advocate
takes a hard, very critical look at wine, since I would prefer to underestimate
the wine’s quality than to overestimate it. The numerical ratings are utilized
only to enhance and complement the thorough tasting notes, which are my primary
means of communicating my judgments to you. Wine Advocate
Rating System 96‑100
An extraordinary wine of profound and complex character displaying all
the attributes expected of a classic wine of its variety. Wines of this caliber
are worth a special effort to find, purchase, and consume. 90‑95 An
outstanding wine of exceptional complexity and character. In short, these are
terrific wines. 80‑89 A
barely above average to very good wine displaying various degrees of finesse
and flavor as well as character with no noticeable flaws. 70‑79 An
average wine with little distinction except that it is soundly made. In
essence, a straightforward, innocuous wine. 60‑69 A
below average wine containing noticeable deficiencies, such as excessive
acidity and/or tannin, an absence of flavor, or possibly dirty aromas or
flavors. 50‑59 A
wine deemed to be unacceptable. Tasting notes and
ratings When possible all of my tastings are done in
peer‑group, single‑blind conditions, (meaning that the same types
of wines are tasted against each other and the producers’ names are not known).
The ratings reflect an independent, critical look at the wines. Neither price
nor the reputation of the producer/grower affect the rating in any manner. I
spend three months of every year tasting in vineyards. During the other nine
months of the year, six and sometimes seven‑day workweeks are devoted
solely to tasting and writing. I do not participate in wine judgings or trade
tastings for many reasons, but principal among these are the following: (1) I
prefer to taste from an entire bottle of wine, (2) I find it essential to have
properly sized and cleaned professional tasting glasses, (3) the temperature of
the wine must be correct, and (4) I prefer to determine the time allocated to
the number of wines to be critiqued.
The numerical rating given is a guide to what I think of the wine vis‑à‑vis
its peer group. Certainly, wines rated above 85 are very good to excellent, and
any wine rated 90 or above will be outstanding for its particular type. While
some have suggested that scoring is not well suited to a beverage that has been
romantically extolled for centuries, wine is no different from any consumer
product. There are specific standards of quality that full‑time wine
professionals recognize, and there are benchmark wines against which others can
be judged. I know of no one with three or four different glasses of wine in
front of him or her, regardless of how good or bad the wines might be, who
cannot say, “I prefer this one to that one.” Scoring wines is simply taking a
professional’s opinion and applying some sort of numerical system to it on a
consistent basis. Scoring permits rapid communication of information to expert
and novice alike.
The score given for a specific wine reflects the quality of the wine at
its best. I often tell people that evaluating a wine and assigning a score to a
beverage that will change and evolve in many cases for up to 10 or more years
is analogous to taking a photograph of a marathon runner. Much can be
ascertained but, like a picture of a moving object, the wine will also evolve
and change. Wines from obviously badly corked or defective bottles are
retasted, since a wine from a single bad bottle does not indicate an entirely
spoiled batch. Many of the wines reviewed have been tasted many times, and the
score represents a cumulative average of the wine’s performance in tastings to
date. Scores, however, do not reveal the important facts about a wine. The
written commentary that accompanies the ratings is a better source of
information regarding the wine’s style and personality, its relative quality
vis‑à‑vis its peers, and its value and aging potential than any
score could ever indicate.
Here then is a general guide to interpreting the numerical ratings: 90‑100
is equivalent to an A and is given only for an outstanding or special effort.
Wines in this category are the very best produced of their type. There is a big
difference between a 90 and 99, but both are top marks. As you will note
through the text, there are few wines that actually make it into this top
category because there are not many great wines. 80‑89
is equivalent to a B in school and such a wine, particularly in the 85‑89
range, is very, very good; many of the wines that fall into this range often
are great values as well. I have many of these wines in my personal collection. 70‑79
represents a C, or average mark, but obviously 79 is a much more desirable
score than 70. Wines that receive scores between 75 and 79 are generally
pleasant, straightforward wines that lack complexity, character, or depth. If
inexpensive, they may be ideal for uncritical quaffing.
Below 70 is a D or F, depending on where you went to school. For wine,
it is a sign of an imbalanced, flawed, or terribly dull or diluted product that
will be of little interest to the discriminating consumer. In
terms of awarding points, my scoring system gives every wine a base of 50
points. The wine’s general color and appearance merit up to 5 points. Since
most wines today are well made, thanks to modern technology and the increased
use of professional oenologists, they tend to receive at least 4, often 5
points. The aroma and bouquet merit up to 15 points, depending on the intensity
level and dimension of the aroma and bouquet as well as the cleanliness of the
wine. The flavor and finish merit up to 20 points, and again, intensity of
flavor, balance, cleanliness, and depth and length on the palate are all
important considerations when giving out points. Finally, the overall quality
level or potential for further evolution and improvement‑aging merits up
to 10 points.
Scores are important for the reader to gauge a professional critic’s
overall qualitative placement of a wine vis‑à‑vis its peer group.
However, it is also vital to consider the description of the wine’s style,
personality, and potential. No scoring system is perfect, but a system that
provides for flexibility in scores, if applied by the same taster without
prejudice, can quantify different levels of wine quality and provide the reader
with one professional’s judgment. However, there can never be any substitute
for your own palate nor any better education than tasting the wine yourself. Wine Enthusiast The Buying Guide includes ratings and
reviews of new releases and selected older wines evaluated by Wine Enthusiast Magazine’s editors and
other qualified tasters. On a regular basis the Buying Guide includes reports
on special tastings and the wines of specific producers. Regular
contributors to our Buying Guide include Tasting Director/Senior Editor Joe
Czerwinski, Senior Editor Daryna Tobey and Contributing Editor Michael
Schachner in New York; European Editor Roger Voss in Bordeaux; West Coast
Editor Steve Heimoff and Editor at Large Jeff Morgan in California; and
Contributing Editor Paul Gregutt in Seattle. On occasion we invite reviews from
a select group of other qualified tasters. If a wine was evaluated by a single
reviewer, that taster’s initials appear following the note. When no initials
appear, the wine was evaluated by two or more reviewers and the score and
tasting note reflect the input of all tasters. Approximately 350 wine reviews are included
each month in the Buying Guide. Each review contains a score on the 100-point
scale, the full name of the wine, its suggested national retail price, and a
tasting note. If price cannot be confirmed, $NA (not available) will be
printed. Prices are for 750 ml bottles unless otherwise indicated. Tasting methodology
and goals Tastings are conducted individually or in a
group setting and performed blind or in accordance with accepted industry
practices. Price is not a factor in assigning scores to wines. Only wines
scoring 80 points or higher are included. When possible, wines considered
flawed or uncustomary are retasted. In some instances production figures are
included as an aid to consumers. Wine Enthusiast Scores 98–100
classic The pinnacle of
quality. 94–97
superb A great achievement. 90–93
excellent Highly recommended. 87–89
very good Often good value; well
recommended. 83–86
good Suitable for everyday
consumption; often good value. 80–82acceptable Can be employed in casual, less-critical
circumstances. Wines receiving a rating below 80 are not
reviewed. Ratings
reflect what our editors felt about a particular wine. Beyond the rating, we
encourage you to read the accompanying tasting note to learn about a wine’s
special characteristics. Special
Designations Editors’ Choice wines are those
that offer excellent quality at a price above our Best Buy range, or a wine at
any price with unique qualities that merit special attention. Cellar Selections are wines deemed
highly collectible and/or requiring time in a temperature-controlled wine
cellar to reach their maximum potential. A Cellar Selection designation does
not mean that a wine must be stored to be enjoyed, but that cellaring will
probably result in a more enjoyable bottle. In general, an optimum time for
cellaring will be indicated. Best Buys are wines that
offer a high level of quality in relation to price. There are no specific
guidelines or formulae for determining Best Buys, but they are generally priced
below $15. Submitting Wines
for Review Wines should be submitted to Wine Enthusiast’s editorial office at
103 Fairview Park Drive, Elmsford, NY 10523. Inquiries and submissions should
be addressed to Tasting Director Joe Czerwinski at 914/345-9463 or e-mail
tastings@wineenthusiast.net. There
is no charge for submitting wines. We make every effort to taste all wines
submitted for review. But there is no guarantee that all wines submitted will
be tasted, or that reviews will appear in the magazine. All wines must be
accompanied by a submission form, which may be downloaded from our website at www.winemag.com/buyingguide/about.asp. Labels Labels are paid promotions. Wineries and
winery representatives are given the opportunity to submit labels, which are
reproduced and printed along with tasting notes and scores. For information on
label purchases, contact Denise Valenza at 813/571-1122; fax 813/571-9977; or
e-mail dvalenza@wineenthusiast.net. Wine
News About the BuyLine
Panel: More than 100 wines are reviewed in every issue
of The Wine News. All wines are tasted double-blind and each entry is evaluated
and scored based upon individual merit. Wines that score above 70 points are
recommended in the BuyLine. Tasting and interpreting wine is a purely
subjective exercise; all scores and accompanying tasting notes represent the
collective opinions of our panel. Wine Samples: Send samples for review with retail price affixed to: The Wine News BuyLine Tasting Panel The Panel: Maurice Adams, specialty food and wine merchant; Lyn Farmer,
senior staff columnist; Abraham Horowitz, BuyLine panelist; Tom E. Smith,
publisher; John Stroker, BuyLine panelist; Fred Tasker, Miami Herald wine
critic; Todd M. Wernstrom, executive editor. Scoring: Tasting notes reflect the panel's collective impressions; scores
are averaged and represent the panel's mean. Wines possessing certain criteria
will be singled out for special recognition: Taster's Choice: Wines which display outstanding quality, character and potential.
Best Value Wines of exceptional quality which sell at a moderate price. 96-100: Superb 90-95: Outstanding 85-89: Very Good 80-84: Good 70-79: Acceptable 0-69: Not Listed Wine Spectator All scores are given on the Wine
Spectator 100-point scale: 95-100, classic; 90-94, outstanding; 80-89, good
to very good; 70-79, average; 60-69, below average; 50-59, poor. When a score
range, rather than a single number, is given, the wine was tasted from barrel
and therefore is reviewed based on its anticipated quality when bottled. Wine
Spectator tasting procedures and taster profiles Wine
Spectator editors review more than 12,000
wines each year in blind tastings. Every issue of Wine Spectator
magazine contains from 400 to more than 1,000 wine reviews with detailed
tasting notes and analysis. We set stringent standards for ourselves and rely
on the proven ability and experience of our editors as tasters and critics. The
following information outlines the guidelines we follow in order to maintain
the integrity of our tastings. Tasting Philosophy What do we review each year? Each
year, more than 12,000 wines from around the world are blind-tasted by our
editors. The majority of these reviews are published in issues throughout the
year, in the Buying Guide section of the magazine. Additional reviews are
posted exclusively on our website. Wine Spectator primarily serves a
national audience, and we therefore prefer to review wines that are widely
available. Where do the wines we review come from? The
majority of the wines we taste are submitted to us by the wineries or their
U.S. importers. Additionally, we spend thousands of dollars each year to buy
wines that are not submitted, at all price levels. Where do we review the wines? Tastings
take place in our four offices, in San Francisco, Napa, New York and Tuscany,
and in the vineyard regions of Europe. Each office has dedicated tasting rooms
and staff to coordinate the tastings. The European tastings are organized and
conducted at independent sites by Wine Spectator staff, never at wine
estates or in the offices of wine companies. Who reviews wines for the magazine? Each
editor generally covers the same wine regions from year to year. These
"beats," as listed below, remain constant, allowing each lead taster
to develop expertise in the region's wines. Other tasters may sit in on blind
tastings in order to help confirm impressions. However, the lead taster always
has the final say on the wine's rating and description. A taster's initials at
the end of the tasting note indicate that the rating and review were created by
that taster in one of our blind tastings. Wines that do not include initials at
the end of the tasting note are wines that were reviewed by two or more
tasters. These tastings are conducted in the same blind setting and are
monitored and guided by the lead taster for that region. Wine
Spectator taster profiles James
Laube, senior editor, Napa Per-Henrik
Mansson, senior editor, Switzerland Kim
Marcus, managing editor, New York Thomas
Matthews, executive editor, New York James
Molesworth, senior editor & tasting coordinator, New York Bruce
Sanderson, senior editor & tasting director, New York Harvey
Steiman, editor at large, San Francisco James
Suckling, senior editor, Tuscany Tasting
editor: Daniel Sogg (San Francisco) Tasting
coordinators: MaryAnn Worobiec Bovio (Napa), Jo Cooke (Tuscany), Alison Napjus
and John Siudut (New York), Connie Shih (San Francisco) Tasting format How are the tastings set up? All
official Wine Spectator tastings are held in private rooms, under
optimum conditions. Our
tasting coordinators organize the wines into flights by varietal, appellation
or region. Each flight may consist of 20 to 30 wines, and no more than two
flights are tasted by a taster each day. Bottles are coded and bagged, and all
capsules and corks are removed. Other necessary efforts are made to conceal the
wines' identity from the tasters. The tasters are told only the general type of
wine (varietal and/or region) and the vintage. No information about the winery
or the price of the wine is available to the tasters while they are tasting. How are the wines tasted? Each
tasting begins with a previously rated wine, which is tasted non-blind as a
reference point. Other previously rated wines are included in the blind wines
to ensure consistency. The tasters enter notes and ratings directly into our
database prior to removal of the bags. The tasters only see the code that matches
that of the bag covering the wine they are tasting, and blank spaces for their
note, score and drink recommendation. Ratings are based on potential quality:
how good the wines will be when they are at their peak. For ageable wines, we
suggest a year or range of years to start drinking the wine. Additional
comments may be added to a tasting note after the identity of the wine has been
revealed, but the score is never changed. Price is not taken into account in
scoring, although the notes are often edited after the scores are determined to
include comments about price and value. All
wines that taste corky or show other major flaws are blind-tasted again from
new bottles. Wines that score highly are also frequently tasted again from new
bottles, in order to confirm our impressions. What are the scoring guidelines? Tasters
for Wine Spectator score wines using our 100-point scale, which is
explained below. Ratings reflect how highly our tasting panel regards each wine
relative to other wines. Other aspects of our tastings Barrel tastings We
also conduct both blind and non-blind tastings of barrel samples from certain
wine regions, including Bordeaux, California Cabernet and vintage Port. Each
wine is rated using a range of scores, and we clearly identify that these
ratings and reviews apply to barrel samples. The filtering, fining and blending
that may occur from barrel to bottle can alter the wine, and we feel this range
of scores represents the wine's potential in the barrel. Non-blind tastings Occasionally
we report on vertical or horizontal tastings that are not blind, organized by
wineries or wine collectors. We always disclose this in the article, and these
notes and scores are separate from the new releases section of our Buying
Guides. Wine Spectator's 100-Point Scale
95-100 classic
A great wine
90-94 outstanding
Superior character and style
85-89 very
good Wine with special
qualities
80-84 good A solid, well-made wine
70-79 average Drinkable wine that may have
minor flaws
60-69 below
average Drinkable but not recommended
50-59 poor Undrinkable, not
recommended
A score given as a range (e.g., 90-94) indicates a
preliminary score, usually based on a barrel tasting. Submission
information We continually review all wines
throughout the year, so you should submit your wines as they are released into
the marketplace. Samples received after a cutoff date for a tasting report will
still be tasted and reviewed, but may be too late for inclusion in the tasting
report. Scheduled issue dates may change without notice. All submissions
must include a suggested retail price and both case production and imported
figures along with their final approved label. Samples submitted without
information or with hand written labels will not be considered. Unfinished
wines, tank or barrel samples are not accepted. We do not guarantee that
unsolicited samples will be reviewed. Bordeaux, Italy and Port are reviewed on
location in Europe. Contact tasting coordinator Jo Cooke in Italy at (011)
39-0-55-977071, via fax at (011) 39-0-55-977051, or via email at jocooke@tin.it
for information on submitting these wines. California is reviewed in our Napa office.
Contact tasting coordinator MaryAnn Worobiec-Bovio at (707) 299-3992, via fax
at (707) 299-3990, or via email at mworobiec@mshanken.com for information on
submitting these wines. Oregon, Washington, Australia and New
Zealand are reviewed in our San Francisco office. Contact assistant
tasting coordinator Connie Shih at (415) 673-2040, via fax at (415) 673-0103 or
via email at cshih@mshanken.com for information on submitting these wines. All
other wines from regions not specifically listed above are reviewed in our New
York office, which can be contacted at (212) 684-4224, via fax at (212) 684-5424
or via email at tastingny@mshanken.com. -- end – Return to
Wine Business World.
|