Monday, September 15, 2014

more on points

The other day I wrote about wine ratings and the point scale.

Today I ran across a nice example of how subjective the whole thing is.  Here is what someone in Cellar Tracker had to say about the 2010 Tablas Creek Esprit de Beaucastel (I X'd out the person's moniker):

9/14/2014 - xxxxxx WROTE: 90 points

Didn't seem to age well. OK, but nothing special

So a wine that is merely "OK, but nothing special" merits 90 points?  

I was wondering if perhaps that is because it is the Esprit de Beaucastel that is being rated and thus any vintage automatically warrants at least a 90 due to its stellar reputation?  

Would an "exceptional" bottle of Two Buck Chuck warrant 85 points, simply because it is Two Buck Chuck and thus could never warrant a score of 90 or above? 

Just some food or wine for thought. 

1 comment:

Jason Haas said...

Ha! I saw that same rating. The thing that I noticed about it was that it was a 2010... which is just a few years old... and they said it didn't seem to age well?! That's a wine that hasn't had a chance to age at all. We feel like it needs to go 8-10 years out to show even secondary characteristics.

Oh, well. The wonders of uncurated data!