Wine Ratings are a Sham

[Michael]

A Hint of Hype, A Taste of Illusion

They pour, sip and, with passion and snobbery, glorify or doom wines. But studies say the wine-rating system is badly flawed. How the experts fare against a coin toss.

Acting on an informant's tip, in June 1973, French tax inspectors barged into the offices of the 155-year-old Cruse et Fils Frères wine shippers. Eighteen men were eventually prosecuted by the French government, accused, among other things, of passing off humble wines from the Languedoc region as the noble and five-times-as-costly wine of Bordeaux. During the trial it came out that the Bordeaux wine merchants regularly defrauded foreigners. One vat of wine considered extremely inferior, for example, was labeled "Salable as Beaujolais to Americans."

It was in this climate that in the 1970s a lawyer-turned-wine-critic named Robert M. Parker Jr. decided to aid consumers by assigning wines a grade on a 100-point scale. Today, critics like Mr. Parker exert enormous influence. The medals won at the 29 major U.S. wine competitions medals are considered so influential that wineries spend well over $1 million each year in entry fees. According to a 2001 study of Bordeaux wines, a one-point bump in Robert Parker's wine ratings averages equates to a 7% increase in price, and the price difference can be much greater at the high end.

Article (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703683804574533840282653628.html)

This should surprise no one who is an actual fan of wine. I discovered back when I was a teenager that wine ratings (and most people) can't tell the difference between 'high end wine' and 'cheap crap'.

I've long since favored a 'trial and error' approach and I only buy cheap wine. I often find superalative wines that everyone loves - and are among the cheapest in the store.

Indeed, I've often asserted that wine is second only to European sports cars as objects of conspicuous consumption - where the sky-high price tag is the only attractive feature.

[Donkey]

I suspect our definition of "cheap" might differ... ;)

[Zarquon]

In complete agreement with the OP, save for the fact that my opinion is based on that of several intelligent food-critics', having never consumed any alcohol myself.

[Michael]

I suspect our definition of "cheap" might differ... ;)
As a general rule, that might be true, but in this case, I refuse to pay more than $12 for any bottle of wine - I prefer to find gems under $10. :)

And my best find of all is a Niagara winery that sells 16L boxes for $100 of oak-aged Merlot. That works out to about $4 per normal sized bottle (750ml).

[Donkey]

As a general rule, that might be true, but in this case, I refuse to pay more than $12 for any bottle of wine - I prefer to find gems under $10. :)

And my best find of all is a Niagara winery that sells 16L boxes for $100 of oak-aged Merlot. That works out to about $4 per normal sized bottle (750ml).
Right on. Do you mean Canadian or US dollars? Though lately that's a minimal difference.

There are a few good wines you can find around here for under five. And a few really awful ones.

[Michael]

Right on. Do you mean Canadian or US dollars? Though lately that's a minimal difference.

There are a few good wines you can find around here for under five. And a few really awful ones.
Those are Canadian dollars, though the difference is only about 5% right now.

And no, we don't have any bottles of wine under $5 - those don't exist at all. The cheapest stuff is usually about $7-$8 a bottle (and most likely to be a local Ontario product).

Though I must say, prices of French wines have been dropping like a rock lately. Apparently Canada is one of the places that took the "Boycott French Wine" movement seriously after the French nuked Bikini Atoll and the French share of the Canadian wine market dropped like a rock (and has never really recovered). Apparently that boycott only really had an effect in Canada, Australia and UK (the inspiration and impetus came from American activists - but Americans don't do boycotts apparently).

Now it is very easy to spot the most pretentious wine-poseurs - they drink only French wine! :lol:

People who truly love wine (around here) usually avoid French wines as being way overpriced crap (or the boycott). So much equal or better quality at half the price if you know how to shop for it.

[Michael]

I think this is an interesting issue. How do we get rid of this elitist rating system that really doesn't serve anyone's interest except the raters?

Personally, I don't care since I never read any wine experts and go by my own taste.

But the fact of the matter is that these wine-tasting rating systems (that don't actually work) are used to define markets, price levels and availability in a way that is pretty much random or arbitrary.

That doesn't serve the interests of wine consumer at all.

Btw, the only two people I know who read wine experts regularly and religiously are the two people I most certainly believe have no taste in wine at all. I'm thinking there is a pattern here. They praise only wines that have been praised by their favorite expert. All other wine is crap by definition to them. It is so easy to fool these people.

And I have another friend who hosts an annual 'wine & cheese' party where every guest brings a bottle of wine and all the guests rate the various bottles that they liked the best.

There are two people who always bring $100 bottles to these events and then make excuses for the fact that my carefully chosen $10 bottle seems to win the vote every time. :D

[The Drunk Girl]

A few summers back, we got some "expensive" wine and it was horribly bitter and dry.

When we get wine we like to get this big jug of Sangria that costs $10 or so or some boxed wine (:lol:). The Sangria in the brand we buy of that is actually pretty good, too. I really don't see "high dollar" wines here in town. I'm not sure if it's because of where we live or my own opinion of what high dollar is. Anyways, what I have found and the prices I pay seem to be reasonable for my taste buds and my pocket!


Acres of Land (http://www.acresoflandwinery.com/) is a winery here in town; their wines are popular and really good. My favorite wine of theirs is the Maggie Adams Blush (http://www.acresoflandwinery.com/showwine.asp?whichwid=5) (the bottle that is pictured runs $12-$13). A nice sweet taste, with a hint of strawberries yet not overwhelming. The winery also had a restaurant that I heard was fantastic, but it burned down sometime last year. I'm not sure if they rebuilding or not.

Wine is not any different than any other kind of booze or beer. You always have your cheap shit, then there is the middle grade/decent/popular stuff (your Smirnoffs, Bacardis, Joses, Beams, etc.) and then the outrageously priced stuff that no one would buy unless they just wanted to show it off (I saw a fifth of bourbon for almost $300 a while back). I'm sorry, but the way I drink that $300 bucks would be long gone and not even worth the hassle. For a price like that I could buy 15 fifths of Jim Beam that would last me the whole year that I could actually drink off of and not have to worry about!

Example: a splurge in beer for us is to buy a case of Killians instead of PBR or Coors Light. Regarding whiskey/bourbons: Maker's Mark instead of Beam. Anything higher in costs I'm not drinking unless it's offered or is bought by someone else for me. :ummm:....possible wedding gift ideas?!?!

[The Drunk Girl]

I think this is an interesting issue. How do we get rid of this elitist rating system that really doesn't serve anyone's interest except the raters?

Personally, I don't care since I never read any wine experts and go by my own taste.

But the fact of the matter is that these wine-tasting rating systems (that don't actually work) are used to define markets, price levels and availability in a way that is pretty much random or arbitrary.

That doesn't serve the interests of wine consumer at all.



Couldn't the same be said about restaurants or shoes/clothes or whatever else for that matter? It's all in who markets what and says whichever is the best...the elite. Stamp a name on it, rack up the prices, and now you have a high dollar commodity.

Concerning restaurants/foods, I have watched those cooking shows where famous chefs are looking for a protege or whatever (I usually tend to watch them when there is nothing else to do). They have them fix these exquisite meals that not only look like shit to me, but I also have no interest whatsoever in eating them. Yet, these meals are supposed to be "special" and above the rest. Screw that! Take me to Outback, damnit! or a nice Italian restaurant. I am not eating to be eating something that is daring or looks pretty, I'm eating because I am hungry and want something that tastes good.

Clothes are the worst, especially in the pre-teen to teenage years. Kids here HAVE to wear Abercrombie and GAP. It's cool shit to them, which is fine and dandy. Their clothes are cute/handsome looking... but $30 for a white tee?! I'll go to WalMart for that. I prefer not to wear logos on my clothes anyways, unless it's UK ;). If I buy a top for $6 bucks and someone says it looks cute then yay me and the people that designed it. If someone says it looks like shit, then I only lost $6.

[Michael]

Example: a splurge in beer for us is to buy a case of Killians instead of PBR or Coors Light. Regarding whiskey/bourbons: Maker's Mark instead of Beam. Anything higher in costs I'm not drinking unless it's offered or is bought by someone else for me. :ummm:....possible wedding gift ideas?!?!

Roger that. A case of Jim Beam if/when I see some wedding pix! :D

[Donkey]

Do liquor stores do wedding registries? ;)

[The Drunk Girl]

If not, there is a first for everything!! That might be fitting considering I want to have a fun and laid back reception. I'm thinking of having a barbecue theme going and my mom already mentioned she knows we'll want an open bar. So the more booze the merrier!

:cheers:

[The Drunk Guy]

I often prefer 'ripple' to the 'finer' wines. A nice metallic and woody $40 Pinot is shit compared to a jug-o-sangria from Livingston for $9. In fact, they can get rid of those fancy names for the different types.

Here's my new list:
Dry White
Sweet White
Blush
Dry Red
Sweet Red
Sangria

There. That's the way it should be because that's all I need to fucking know. If my food is so bland that I can taste that "subtle hint of Black Valley pomegranates" at the end, then I seriously need to find something good to eat and something better to drink.

[Americano]

Article (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703683804574533840282653628.html)

This should surprise no one who is an actual fan of wine. I discovered back when I was a teenager that wine ratings (and most people) can't tell the difference between 'high end wine' and 'cheap crap'.

I've long since favored a 'trial and error' approach and I only buy cheap wine. I often find superalative wines that everyone loves - and are among the cheapest in the store.

Indeed, I've often asserted that wine is second only to European sports cars as objects of conspicuous consumption - where the sky-high price tag is the only attractive feature.

On the sports car comparison that was a fact only when the original Shelby Cobra was produced 40+ years ago. With that exception US Corvettes or Shelby/Mustangs have been and are pieces of crap when compared to Ferrari, Benz and other European offerings.

[partofme]

I actually like boxed red wine.

[Michael]

I often prefer 'ripple' to the 'finer' wines. A nice metallic and woody $40 Pinot is shit compared to a jug-o-sangria from Livingston for $9. In fact, they can get rid of those fancy names for the different types.

Here's my new list:
Dry White
Sweet White
Blush
Dry Red
Sweet Red
Sangria

There. That's the way it should be because that's all I need to fucking know. If my food is so bland that I can taste that "subtle hint of Black Valley pomegranates" at the end, then I seriously need to find something good to eat and something better to drink.

:thumbsup:

:rofl:

[Michael]

I actually like boxed red wine.

Like I said, I buy a 16 L box (that's slightly bigger than 1 US gallon) of oak-aged Merlot all the time. I found a great Niagara winery that makes it very consistently. Damn fine table wine and much better than many bottled varieties.

(that 16 L box lasts exactly two months) :D

Indeed, boxed red wine is pretty good because of red wine's 'aging' problem. White wines can survive re-corked in your fridge for several days or even weeks if it is semi-sweet. But red wine is dead 6-8 hours after you pull the cork no matter what.

So with boxed wine, one can have a glass of red wine every day with dinner. I consider this an official health rule! :D

[Greendruid]

Like I said, I buy a 16 L box (that's slightly bigger than 1 US gallon) of oak-aged Merlot all the time. I found a great Niagara winery that makes it very consistently. Damn fine table wine and much better than many bottled varieties.

(that 16 L box lasts exactly two months) :D

Indeed, boxed red wine is pretty good because of red wine's 'aging' problem. White wines can survive re-corked in your fridge for several days or even weeks if it is semi-sweet. But red wine is dead 6-8 hours after you pull the cork no matter what.

So with boxed wine, one can have a glass of red wine every day with dinner. I consider this an official health rule! :D

For those of us privy to the Canadian wine market, care to share the name of this vintner? We may or may not be able to get it out here. I've certainly seen Jackson-Triggs and Peelee Island out here but I've been more into mead lately (i.e. past 4 years or so).

[Michael]

For those of us privy to the Canadian wine market, care to share the name of this vintner? We may or may not be able to get it out here. I've certainly seen Jackson-Triggs and Peelee Island out here but I've been more into mead lately (i.e. past 4 years or so).
Magnotta. They are one of the largest wineries in Ontario (if not the largest).

I'd be curious if you can get it down there.

[Michael]

Couldn't the same be said about restaurants or shoes/clothes or whatever else for that matter? It's all in who markets what and says whichever is the best...the elite. Stamp a name on it, rack up the prices, and now you have a high dollar commodity.
Actually, I think this is rather different.

With movie reviewers (for example) they have no actual effect on the industry they cover. It is well known fact that 'word-of-mouth' will make or break any Hollywood movie and that reviews are entirely irrelevant to that fact. Likewise with the restaurant reviews and/or the fashion set (though to a lesser extent since these are localized and 'insider' type businesses, they are susceptible to the whims of reviewers, but only because it is a very small club).

But wine is apparently different. The ratings scales applied (arbitrarily) appaerntly establish price points in the market - and availability. Thus, there is a formalized component to the game here - with the pretense of objectivity.

Restaurant or movie reviewers do not pretent to be making perfectly objective ratings of these products. Wine reviewers do.

Now I don't care if some people want to be wine critics and some people want to read their opinions. That's all well and fine. But those opinions are not factual or objective and they have a material effect on the market because everyone pretends that these reviews are indeed, factual and objective (which the study cited in the OP suggests they are neither). Thus, the wine ratings game harms or arbitrarily interferes with the wine market in a way that movie reviews do not harm or arbitrarily interferes with movie making or movie watching.

[The Drunk Girl]

Actually, I think this is rather different.

With movie reviewers (for example) they have no actual effect on the industry they cover. It is well known fact that 'word-of-mouth' will make or break any Hollywood movie and that reviews are entirely irrelevant to that fact. Likewise with the restaurant reviews and/or the fashion set (though to a lesser extent since these are localized and 'insider' type businesses, they are susceptible to the whims of reviewers, but only because it is a very small club).

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't that what we are doing here? Through 'word-of-mouth' Greendruid's interest peaked at the description of Magnotta you gave. And, from what has been said so far in here, it wouldn't seem that what wine critics have to say or the price on the bottle has steered us otherwise.

But wine is apparently different. The ratings scales applied (arbitrarily) appaerntly establish price points in the market - and availability. Thus, there is a formalized component to the game here - with the pretense of objectivity.

Restaurant or movie reviewers do not pretent to be making perfectly objective ratings of these products. Wine reviewers do.


Then why have star ratings for restaurants? These restaurants are supposed to be the best around, right? Have I ever been to one?...no, and will I ever? Probably not. Yet, people are supposed to take the reviews (and the stars) and correlate it to meaning this is some of the best dining one could ever have. The rating is there, the price is there, and the limited availability is there.

Movies are a toss up to me. I agree with what you have to say about 'word-of-mouth'. People are more apt to try something they heard from someone they can relate to.

There are so many places for movie reviews these days, that it really has become hard to find which movies are worth watching (and sometimes it is quite the joke). Yet, there are the Oscars and the numerous film festivals (that eventually get stamped on the movie box cover); where people/critics/reviewers rate films as being "the best in..."

Hell there have been previews I have seen, but they were only showing in select cities or only for a limited time. Once again, the ratings, the price, and sometimes the limited availability are apparent in this market.

Nonetheless, they all seem to be only opinions in my book. It is some people's jobs/careers to do this, and because they are a little more knowledgeable (supposedly) on the given topic their opinions could be viewed as objective to some given their title as 'critic', 'reviewer', or 'expert'. However, none are objective at all because all are merely opinions.

These people make their livings trying to convince people of what they think is right or true. A majority of the time they are lucky and are able to do so, but these people just possess a power I like to refer to as "the gift of gab". However, I learned a long time ago not to just take what someone tells you without questioning or looking further into it. ;)

[justabubba]

would really want to know the name of the Niagra vinter if you are willing to disclose it
always looking to buy good value
i tend to drink expensive beer (newcastle, dogs head, s' peters) and cheap wine (german white and cali blush) ... but that's just the way what i enjoy seems to be priced
the public - or at least large segments - do seem to be influenced by price as an absolute indicator of value. if the marketeer can project a high dollar cache for the offered product or service, then that pads the bottom line. smart business
and i do believe that many of these ratings services are effectively bought off by the vendors. caveat emptor!
but some of the OPs objections may have much more to do with dissimilar tastes. i can't stand polka, opera, nasal bluegrass. so, that person who rates them highly is going to have zero credibility with me
instead, i look for rating guides which seem to be in sync with my own (weird) tastes in music, food, wine, beer, movies, tools, cars, vacation desitinations, etc. once they are found, it makes buyers' remorse happen much less frequently

[Michael]

would really want to know the name of the Niagra vinter if you are willing to disclose it

www.magnotta.com

I buy the 16 L box of Oak-aged Merlot (regularly!).

The website allows one to shop online... not sure where you are at though. I can easily drive to a local outlet here in Toronto, so that's where I get it.

always looking to buy good value
i tend to drink expensive beer (newcastle, dogs head, s' peters) and cheap wine (german white and cali blush) ... but that's just the way what i enjoy seems to be priced
I'm a Guinness guy myself - that stuff ain't cheap at all - given that I don't live in the UK where it is local! :lol:

Other than that, I usually buy cheap beer at home (too many mooching type friends I guess). In Canada, our booze taxes make wine/beer/alcohol rather more expensive on average than in the US. Our average beer prices are probably double those in the US, though there is a quality and alcohol content difference with beer. :D

and i do believe that many of these ratings services are effectively bought off by the vendors. caveat emptor!
Sometimes it seems as if caveat emptor is the motto of our modern society!

but some of the OPs objections may have much more to do with dissimilar tastes. i can't stand polka, opera, nasal bluegrass. so, that person who rates them highly is going to have zero credibility with me
instead, i look for rating guides which seem to be in sync with my own (weird) tastes in music, food, wine, beer, movies, tools, cars, vacation desitinations, etc. once they are found, it makes buyers' remorse happen much less frequently
Yes, I agree completely. When it comes to something as subjective as taste in wine (or anything else) it is impossible to have an objective rating system.

There are always objective things one can compare (price, availablity, size, etc.) but "taste" seems to be one that just doesn't work that way. So the best thing to do is exactly what you suggest - find a critic that matches or suits your own subjective bias.

P.S. Welcome to the forum! :)