Comments on: On 100-point wines http://winecast.net/2007/03/06/on-100-point-wines/ A wine podcast and blog Tue, 02 Dec 2008 14:52:33 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: DancingDavidE http://winecast.net/2007/03/06/on-100-point-wines/#comment-53088 DancingDavidE Sat, 17 Mar 2007 21:23:37 +0000 http://winecast.net/2007/03/06/on-100-point-wines/#comment-53088 It's especially difficult for many of us that may not have the means to dabble in the 95+ area very often. The 100 rating stands out, but really for me I wouldn't know 100 from 99 or 98 if I tasted it. It’s especially difficult for many of us that may not have the means to dabble in the 95+ area very often. The 100 rating stands out, but really for me I wouldn’t know 100 from 99 or 98 if I tasted it.

]]> By: Sagi Solomon http://winecast.net/2007/03/06/on-100-point-wines/#comment-52981 Sagi Solomon Wed, 07 Mar 2007 19:54:44 +0000 http://winecast.net/2007/03/06/on-100-point-wines/#comment-52981 Hi Tim, I think you clearly articulate the challenges inherent in using any type of rating scale (points, stars, etc.), as well as the difficulty in standardizing reviews of any product whose “quality� is based on the tastes of the reviewer. I have always found it difficult to understand the subtle differences between an 89-point wine and a 91-point wine (or even larger gaps at times). These ratings are only part of the whole research process, and they should be viewed as that. Your post also highlights the important role of the Wine 2.0 sites. For the first time, consumers have the opportunity to share their opinions and research the opinions of a diverse group of individuals. The trick is standardizing those opinions and deriving a meaningful comparison among the many reviewers. The way we address this problem at OpenBottles is that we reduce the rating to the lowest common denominator that everyone can relate to – whether the wine tastes good (it is an esthetic good afterall). Using this measure, we can provide a meaningful representation of the information that is most relevant to consumers. The difference between 89 and 91 is removed, as is the debate about whether the tastes of any one individual are skewed toward specific characteristics. So the bottom line to me is that the more information consumers have the better. Cheers, Sagi Hi Tim,

I think you clearly articulate the challenges inherent in using any type of rating scale (points, stars, etc.), as well as the difficulty in standardizing reviews of any product whose “quality� is based on the tastes of the reviewer. I have always found it difficult to understand the subtle differences between an 89-point wine and a 91-point wine (or even larger gaps at times). These ratings are only part of the whole research process, and they should be viewed as that.

Your post also highlights the important role of the Wine 2.0 sites. For the first time, consumers have the opportunity to share their opinions and research the opinions of a diverse group of individuals. The trick is standardizing those opinions and deriving a meaningful comparison among the many reviewers. The way we address this problem at OpenBottles is that we reduce the rating to the lowest common denominator that everyone can relate to – whether the wine tastes good (it is an esthetic good afterall). Using this measure, we can provide a meaningful representation of the information that is most relevant to consumers. The difference between 89 and 91 is removed, as is the debate about whether the tastes of any one individual are skewed toward specific characteristics.

So the bottom line to me is that the more information consumers have the better.

Cheers,

Sagi

]]>