I quit "analyzing" the stars when you yelled at me. I became a good sandboxer.

I hate wine scores even more than I do restaurant stars. The people who come into wine shops and ask to be shown only the wines that score 90 or better from Parker or the Wine Spectator are missing out on alot of good fermented grape juice. The same goes for diners who would only go to restaurants you rate 3 stars or above. I am certain they would be missing out on alot of good food.

And I appreciated that. :-) EL

This post got me digging through my food library where I found my 1967 copy of Wine: An Introduction for Americans by M.A. Amerine and V.L. Singleton. Therein I found several handwritten copies of a rating scale that I used when I taught a wine-tasting course in college. (The drinking age was 18 in Massachusetts in those days and I was quite experienced by 21, since I spent all my beer money on wine.) The scale was apparently devised by the University of California at Davis for its viticulture program, as was the book itself, which says a lot for how far we've come in 50 years!

The scale has 20 points, not 100. They are given thusly:

Appearance: 2 (cloudy=0, clear=1, brilliant=2)

Color: 2 (off=0, slightly off=1, correct=2)

Aroma & Bouquet: 4 (vinous=1, distinct but not varietal=2, varietal=3) Subtract 1 or 2 for off odors; Add 1 for "bottle bouquet"

Vinegary Odor 2 (obvious=0, slight=1; none=2)

Total Acidity: 2 (distinctly high or low=0, slightly off=1, normal=2)

Sweetness: 1 (too high or two low=0, normal=1)

Body: 1 (too much or too little=0, normal=1)

Flavor: 2 (distinctly abnormal=0, abnormal=1, normal=2)

Bitterness: 2 (distinctly bitter=0, slightly bitter=1, normal=2)

General Quality: 2 (lacking=0, slight=1, impressive=2)

I find it interesting that the wine industry has progressed to the point where some of these tasting points are simply not at issue at all anymore. When was the last time that you tasted a wine that was distinctly vinegary -- other than a bad or corked bottle??

My hunch is that most of us can handle the distinctions represented in a 20 point scale, but there is probably a very small percentage who can handle all 100 points.

We had rockfish tonight with a South African Mulderbosch 2007 Sauvignon Blanc (highly praised by this month's Consumer Reports) which I rated a 17. One point only for acidity, no additional point for bottle aroma, two points only for taste & aroma.

Interesting topic. Numerical ratings have their place. Not many people have the time to research or even read the small notes under the wines they buy. However, they can easily understand a numerical score. Everything we do is rated with that. Whether one uses 20 or 100 points or uses something like stars, its very easy to understand what is being said.

Interesting you would bring this topic up. I've been waiting for years for you to come out with some sort of wine list ratings for your reviews. A wine list adds to the value of a restaurant (depending on the restaurant of course). So it should be used in a review.

Thanks,
mn

I don't consider myself enough of an expert to do so. EL