Scoring System


If I ever run a wine mag I will do all my scoring like this.

I do my best, with the limited expertise at my disposal, to rate wines based on objective (or quasi-objective) factors like complexity of flavours, overall balance and structure (whether the acidity, tannins, alcohol and other elements of the wine are all in sync and don’t overwhelm one another), length of finish, etc., and if a particular bottle is a well-made example of a certain style, I will certainly try to mention that, even if the style in question isn’t my favourite.  But I don’t pretend that the scores I give wines in this blog are anything other than the overall evaluation that my own palate makes of a specific bottle.  If I like or dislike a wine for “objective” reasons, I will try to spell them out, but if it just doesn’t subjectively do it for me, it may get a lower score here than in other, more reputable sources.  But I can only write what I know, and I’m hoping that I won’t needlessly slag too many wines just because I don’t like them, since there aren’t really a whole lot of styles of wine that I dislike (unless they’re 18% alcohol or just, well, suck).

I score all of the wines I drink on the now-ubiquitous 100-point scale.  I’m actually not the hugest fan of this scoring system, because only on the rarest occasions involving the very worst wines do you ever see a professional wine reviewer score a wine below 80 points.  Why have a scale if you don’t use 4/5ths of it?  If 49% is a failing grade in every school I’ve ever been to, why is 79% a failing grade in the world of wine?  Do the reviewers not want to hurt people’s feelings?  Do they think that every wine has 78+ points out of 100 worth of redeeming quality in it?  I have no idea.  And yet I’m still using this bizarre, flawed scale in PnP, because it has come to have a generally-accepted meaning that most people reading up about wine come to understand.  Roughly speaking, this meaning, which forms the basis of my personal scoring system on this site, is something like:

  • Under 80 points: Horrible, embarrassing wine fail.  Burn all your vines and go back to school to learn how to do something else.
  • 80-85 points: Definitely not good, but not totally, abjectly awful.  I’m not impressed, but if the wine is really cheap, I might overlook (most of) its flaws.
  • 85-89 points: Now we’re getting somewhere.  More interesting, more high-quality, more serious, more oomph.
  • 90-95 points: Fantastic, complex, thoughtful, impressive juice.  Honour roll wines.
  • 95-99 points: Classic, unbelievable, collectible wines to be cellared and opened only on special occasions or if you’re made of money.  The creme de la creme.
  • 100 points: The Platonic ideal of wine.  Not sure if I’ll ever see one in my life, but never say never…

So there you have it.  Wine Spectator might put it in slightly different terms, but I think we all get to the same place in the end.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




%d bloggers like this: