Comments on: The Wine Rating Scale Debate http://winecast.net/2006/01/14/the-wine-rating-scale-debate/ A wine podcast and blog Thu, 20 Nov 2008 12:55:50 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Winecast » Blog Archive » Regarding “Top 10″ Lists http://winecast.net/2006/01/14/the-wine-rating-scale-debate/#comment-39982 Winecast » Blog Archive » Regarding “Top 10″ Lists Thu, 24 Aug 2006 14:05:01 +0000 http://winecast.net/?p=304#comment-39982 [...] As mentioned here in the past, I’m a fan of Tom Wark’s FERMENTATION blog. Not only does he post often, he regularly is provocative in his views on the business of wine. From time to time he puts his tongue a bit in his cheek and posts Top 10 lists; today’s post got me thinking about the top 10 wine blogs. I know there is a list out there of the top 100 wine blogs, but it seems a bit off for me with non-blogs and defunct blogs listed. Since I wanted this information for a couple of projects I am working on, I looked into the only objective ranking system I trust in the blogosphere: Technorati. Over the past few weeks I have chipped away and logging in 50 wine blogs gleaned from my aggregator and the “top 100″ list, weeding out the entries that aren’t actively being published or are not really blogs in the first place. [...] [...] As mentioned here in the past, I’m a fan of Tom Wark’s FERMENTATION blog. Not only does he post often, he regularly is provocative in his views on the business of wine. From time to time he puts his tongue a bit in his cheek and posts Top 10 lists; today’s post got me thinking about the top 10 wine blogs. I know there is a list out there of the top 100 wine blogs, but it seems a bit off for me with non-blogs and defunct blogs listed. Since I wanted this information for a couple of projects I am working on, I looked into the only objective ranking system I trust in the blogosphere: Technorati. Over the past few weeks I have chipped away and logging in 50 wine blogs gleaned from my aggregator and the “top 100″ list, weeding out the entries that aren’t actively being published or are not really blogs in the first place. [...]

]]> By: Winecast » Blog Archive » Wine rating poll http://winecast.net/2006/01/14/the-wine-rating-scale-debate/#comment-37082 Winecast » Blog Archive » Wine rating poll Thu, 18 May 2006 23:58:25 +0000 http://winecast.net/?p=304#comment-37082 [...] It’s time to revisit the issue of wine ratings used here and on the podcast. Earlier this year, I flirted with the idea of discontinuing the system I was using but listener and reader response was so compelling that I stayed the course. Recent feedback has compelled me to post a poll on the right sidebar to let you help me figure out what to do (if anything). The 20 point scale I have been using is the first choice, followed by the 100 point scale used by Robert Parker, Steve Tanzer and the Wine Spectator (with subtle differences in degrees between them). The 5 star system used by Decanter and some others rounds out the choices. If you have other ideas, choose “Other” and post them in the comments here. I’ll keep this open for a few weeks before making any decisions. [...] [...] It’s time to revisit the issue of wine ratings used here and on the podcast. Earlier this year, I flirted with the idea of discontinuing the system I was using but listener and reader response was so compelling that I stayed the course. Recent feedback has compelled me to post a poll on the right sidebar to let you help me figure out what to do (if anything). The 20 point scale I have been using is the first choice, followed by the 100 point scale used by Robert Parker, Steve Tanzer and the Wine Spectator (with subtle differences in degrees between them). The 5 star system used by Decanter and some others rounds out the choices. If you have other ideas, choose “Other” and post them in the comments here. I’ll keep this open for a few weeks before making any decisions. [...]

]]> By: Winecast » Blog Archive » Wine Ratings Revisited http://winecast.net/2006/01/14/the-wine-rating-scale-debate/#comment-35084 Winecast » Blog Archive » Wine Ratings Revisited Wed, 18 Jan 2006 19:21:46 +0000 http://winecast.net/?p=304#comment-35084 [...] My comments the other day sparked a good discussion about the usefulness of ratings for sorting through the massive amount of wines out there and keeping track of them in cellar management systems or tasting logs. Since I am not a super-taster like Mr. Parker, I will continue to use my 20 point scale. I also liked David’s suggestion of calibrating the scale with a “7″, which might lead to an interesting show theme. [...] [...] My comments the other day sparked a good discussion about the usefulness of ratings for sorting through the massive amount of wines out there and keeping track of them in cellar management systems or tasting logs. Since I am not a super-taster like Mr. Parker, I will continue to use my 20 point scale. I also liked David’s suggestion of calibrating the scale with a “7″, which might lead to an interesting show theme. [...]

]]> By: Doug Smith http://winecast.net/2006/01/14/the-wine-rating-scale-debate/#comment-34805 Doug Smith Tue, 17 Jan 2006 14:16:59 +0000 http://winecast.net/?p=304#comment-34805 Ratings systems are used by everyone in the wine industry, so I felt that McCoy's attacks on the 100-point system were either totally off-base or just plain hypocritical. Whether you use "stars", Excellent/Very Good/Good/Bad, 1-5, 1-20, 1-40, 50-100 really doesn't matter: they are all mathematically identical, the only difference being one of precision. If you feel that you can get precise enough to make (roughly) 50 fine distinctions between the worst vinegar and the finest Bordeaux, etc., then Parker's 50 point scale is fine. (Also as Brian notes, it's used in places like CellarTracker). If you think you can only make five basic distinctions then use another. Every such system is always going to be somewhat subjective ... but I don't think that's anything we can ever get away from. Even tasting notes are subjective. But whatever the case, *some* sort of grading system is necessary or wine criticism and review becomes useless. After reading the tasting note, we also want to know how *good* the reviewer thinks the wine is ... and there's no other way than some rating system that is at least implicitly numeric. I agree that many times it doesn't seem people use much of the ratings scale ... but OTOH a lot of that is because more "geeky" wine drinkers already are smart enough to stay away from a lot of the "plonk" out there ... ;-) Ratings systems are used by everyone in the wine industry, so I felt that McCoy’s attacks on the 100-point system were either totally off-base or just plain hypocritical. Whether you use “stars”, Excellent/Very Good/Good/Bad, 1-5, 1-20, 1-40, 50-100 really doesn’t matter: they are all mathematically identical, the only difference being one of precision. If you feel that you can get precise enough to make (roughly) 50 fine distinctions between the worst vinegar and the finest Bordeaux, etc., then Parker’s 50 point scale is fine. (Also as Brian notes, it’s used in places like CellarTracker). If you think you can only make five basic distinctions then use another. Every such system is always going to be somewhat subjective … but I don’t think that’s anything we can ever get away from. Even tasting notes are subjective.

But whatever the case, *some* sort of grading system is necessary or wine criticism and review becomes useless. After reading the tasting note, we also want to know how *good* the reviewer thinks the wine is … and there’s no other way than some rating system that is at least implicitly numeric.

I agree that many times it doesn’t seem people use much of the ratings scale … but OTOH a lot of that is because more “geeky” wine drinkers already are smart enough to stay away from a lot of the “plonk” out there …

;-)

]]> By: DancingDavidE http://winecast.net/2006/01/14/the-wine-rating-scale-debate/#comment-34630 DancingDavidE Mon, 16 Jan 2006 01:48:16 +0000 http://winecast.net/?p=304#comment-34630 I think the problem isn't with the 100 point scale, but rather than we don't use all of it. I think vinegar would rate a 65 by some reviewers. Even on your "20 point" scale, we end up with a lot of ratings between 7 and 9.5, Tim ;) 20 deliniations seems like plenty, and not suggesting that you should start buying lesser quality wine, but there isn't any reference established for what would garner a 2 or a 3. If you did a review and gave something a 3, and then I went out and bought it (since it should be very cheap!) and tried it, then we'd both have a common reference for how good a 7 is. I guess I'm in favor of a hybrid scale: the "official scale" should have the ratings from 6 to 10 in half-point increments, but anything below 5 should just be an "F" as it doesn't matter how bad it is at that point. I think the problem isn’t with the 100 point scale, but rather than we don’t use all of it.

I think vinegar would rate a 65 by some reviewers.

Even on your “20 point” scale, we end up with a lot of ratings between 7 and 9.5, Tim ;)

20 deliniations seems like plenty, and not suggesting that you should start buying lesser quality wine, but there isn’t any reference established for what would garner a 2 or a 3. If you did a review and gave something a 3, and then I went out and bought it (since it should be very cheap!) and tried it, then we’d both have a common reference for how good a 7 is.

I guess I’m in favor of a hybrid scale: the “official scale” should have the ratings from 6 to 10 in half-point increments, but anything below 5 should just be an “F” as it doesn’t matter how bad it is at that point.

]]> By: Bryan http://winecast.net/2006/01/14/the-wine-rating-scale-debate/#comment-34476 Bryan Sun, 15 Jan 2006 02:41:24 +0000 http://winecast.net/?p=304#comment-34476 I find that the 100 point scale is useful for my own records such as my cellartracker account. As far as a public wine review, I enjoy assigning the grade school A+ through F grade system. Cheers! I find that the 100 point scale is useful for my own records such as my cellartracker account. As far as a public wine review, I enjoy assigning the grade school A+ through F grade system. Cheers!

]]> By: Tim http://winecast.net/2006/01/14/the-wine-rating-scale-debate/#comment-34470 Tim Sun, 15 Jan 2006 01:01:13 +0000 http://winecast.net/?p=304#comment-34470 Thanks, Stacy, for your point of view on the issue. OK, now I'm leaning in the direction of keeping my 20 point scale but would like to hear from other listeners and readers. Thanks, Stacy, for your point of view on the issue. OK, now I’m leaning in the direction of keeping my 20 point scale but would like to hear from other listeners and readers.

]]> By: Stacy Doran http://winecast.net/2006/01/14/the-wine-rating-scale-debate/#comment-34462 Stacy Doran Sat, 14 Jan 2006 20:15:05 +0000 http://winecast.net/?p=304#comment-34462 As a newer wine drinker who isn't really sure how all of the adjectives apply to the wines that I like (for example, I'm not really sure whether I prefer "fruity" to "dry" or a "plush finish" to "high tannins") I just really enjoy experimenting. I have limited funds and can't afford a hit-or-miss approach to finding new wines that I like. I want to know which wines are the "favorites" and the numerical system works well for that. Maybe I will change my mind as I learn more about wine and began to get a real understanding about what all the adjectives mean, but for now I just want you to tell me what wine to try next... Thanks! As a newer wine drinker who isn’t really sure how all of the adjectives apply to the wines that I like (for example, I’m not really sure whether I prefer “fruity” to “dry” or a “plush finish” to “high tannins”) I just really enjoy experimenting. I have limited funds and can’t afford a hit-or-miss approach to finding new wines that I like. I want to know which wines are the “favorites” and the numerical system works well for that. Maybe I will change my mind as I learn more about wine and began to get a real understanding about what all the adjectives mean, but for now I just want you to tell me what wine to try next…

Thanks!

]]> By: Tim http://winecast.net/2006/01/14/the-wine-rating-scale-debate/#comment-34460 Tim Sat, 14 Jan 2006 19:18:35 +0000 http://winecast.net/?p=304#comment-34460 Good points in favor of the numerical system, Tony. I do see how it makes it much easier to sort and find wines within a certain range on computers. What troubles me about the 100 point scale, is I believe the precision of a 89 vs. a 91 is almost totally subjective, but it appears to be very precise as if some sort of instrument was used. In such a case on my 20 point scale, both wines would garner a "delicious" 9 out of 10. I think this lack of precision, coupled with a numerical value for use in sorting lists might be the right balance, so I am inclined to stay the course. It will be interesting to hear other views on this, as well, as I am still open to change... Good points in favor of the numerical system, Tony. I do see how it makes it much easier to sort and find wines within a certain range on computers. What troubles me about the 100 point scale, is I believe the precision of a 89 vs. a 91 is almost totally subjective, but it appears to be very precise as if some sort of instrument was used. In such a case on my 20 point scale, both wines would garner a “delicious” 9 out of 10. I think this lack of precision, coupled with a numerical value for use in sorting lists might be the right balance, so I am inclined to stay the course.

It will be interesting to hear other views on this, as well, as I am still open to change…

]]> By: Tony Ricciardi http://winecast.net/2006/01/14/the-wine-rating-scale-debate/#comment-34459 Tony Ricciardi Sat, 14 Jan 2006 18:55:16 +0000 http://winecast.net/?p=304#comment-34459 Tim, I for one am in favor of the numerical system. I currently maintain a wine database which contains my entire cellar (currently, about 320 bottles), purchase history and tasting notes on all the wines I've tasted over the last 10 or so years. That comes to approximately 1,200 records. I deduced very early on that I would require a numerical system simply because the verbiage I would use to describe the wines would at some point become very repetitive and my notes would eventually become pedestrian. I am perusing my tasting notes as I write you this, and I can see that I've used the word "amazing" almost a dozen times in the last three months. These wines that garnered an amazing description however, ranged in numerical score from 93-98. For me at least, the numerical system allows me to be more precise with my overall impression of a wine. Another reason I use the numerical system also deals with volume. If I am having a dinner party and I'd like to serve a very nice Shiraz for example, it's much easier for me to scroll through my numerical scores within the Shiraz listings rather than click on each tasting note and make a judgement as to whether or not this wine would be a good one to serve. My two cents. Best of luck. Tim,

I for one am in favor of the numerical system. I currently maintain a wine database which contains my entire cellar (currently, about 320 bottles), purchase history and tasting notes on all the wines I’ve tasted over the last 10 or so years. That comes to approximately 1,200 records. I deduced very early on that I would require a numerical system simply because the verbiage I would use to describe the wines would at some point become very repetitive and my notes would eventually become pedestrian. I am perusing my tasting notes as I write you this, and I can see that I’ve used the word “amazing” almost a dozen times in the last three months. These wines that garnered an amazing description however, ranged in numerical score from 93-98. For me at least, the numerical system allows me to be more precise with my overall impression of a wine.

Another reason I use the numerical system also deals with volume. If I am having a dinner party and I’d like to serve a very nice Shiraz for example, it’s much easier for me to scroll through my numerical scores within the Shiraz listings rather than click on each tasting note and make a judgement as to whether or not this wine would be a good one to serve.

My two cents.

Best of luck.

]]>