There are few subjects as controversial in the world of wine as the objectivity of wine evaluations. The concept of writing tasting notes to describe the flavour of wines has been around for almost 200 years. Over the last few decades, it has become common practice for judges in wine competitions, wine writers and “experts”, wine critics and reviewers, wine marketers and restaurant sommeliers to evaluate, review and assess wines and award or promote – one way or another – their personal favourite wines.
The sheer volume of wine produced annually overwhelms the individual consumer’s ability to determine what to buy based on his or her personal preferences. It has become even harder over the years because there used to be much more variation in quality, but research into grape growing and winemaking, plus the commitment to quality by producers worldwide, has raised the bar. Consequently, in recent years it has become fashionable for consumers to rely on the opinions of “experts” in choosing their wines. The consumer’s goal is to spend his or her money wisely and to achieve maximum drinking pleasure while avoiding outright buying “mistakes”.
More and more newspapers and magazines have introduced wine columns to cater for this demand. Obviously, to a certain degree this reflects a general increase of interest in wine. In theory, expert comments are impartial. However to a certain extent, the purpose of wine columns is to attract drinks advertising. Newspaper columnists are required to recommend widely available wines. This is because their readership largely buys wine as a convenience product, popping a few bottles in with their weekly supermarket shopping.
The wine market is influenced today by price and quantity, the two vital factors for any wine to take its place on the shelves of the major distribution chains. The country of origin may be different, the labels may be different, the vintages may be different, even the prices may be slightly different, but the wines rapidly begin to all taste the same. This is because they are the result of industrial products. Advertisement, promotion through press, online and printed material constitutes the main influence. Newspapers and magazines are economically dependant on advertising. In fact, more than 40% of their revenue is derived from advertising. Of course, advertisers are not amused by articles which are critical of their products. Consequently, a consumer is unlikely to find an unbiased and objective opinion in a newspaper or wine magazine.
Over the years, the evaluation of wines evolved from simple wine tasting notes to complex numerical scorings. Today there are essentially two basic systems – descriptive (non-numerical) and numerical. A growing number of people, from producers and retailers, to wine writers and consumers, have begun to rely on numerical ratings to describe wines in conjunction with tasting notes. Critics are employing similar conventions when reviewing medals in wine competitions.
While the composition of tasting notes and other forms of wine literature have existed throughout the history of wine, the widespread use of numerical rating systems is a relatively recent phenomenon. In 1978, Robert M. Parker, a wine critic, introduced the 100-point system to the wine world when he started a wine-buying guide called “The Wine Advocate”. The 100-point rating system was created as a way of helping wine buyers decide which wines were the best while avoiding those that just didn’t measure up. Parker’s wine-ranking scale rates wines on a points system from 50 to 100. But there are also other scoring systems that have their advocates, such as the UC Davis 20-point scale and the Decanter magazine 1- to 5-star rating system. Many wine sellers and tasters use a combination of these rating scales. Scoring wines has its basis in the assumption that wines have attributes that can usefully be summarized by means of a numerical rating. The aim of every scoring system is to find a numerical expression of the overall quality of the wine based on its individual sensory expressions. The numerical scoring system differentiates the quality for each wine separately by assigning in every index of quality (aroma, colour, taste, total expression, etc.) a certain number of points. The sum of the points of individual indices gives the quality of the wine.
Proponents of numerical systems appear to believe that despite there being subjectivity in scoring, a numerical score is not only the most widely used standard but that any consumer can easily appreciate that a grade of 98 is good and a 72 score not so good. Under this system, a 96 to 100 is an extraordinary wine, 90 to 95 are excellent, and 80 to 89 are above average to very good. Measuring things facilitates objective comparison – it lets you work out what is “the best”. Proponents of scoring believe that consumers can learn from experienced critics, even if they sometimes disagree with their conclusions.
In the hands of marketers who have transformed wine into a multibillion-dollar industry, the number is often all that counts. High scores equal high sales and eventually long term success for wineries. A wine with a high score separates itself from the pack and lends itself to a purchase. Whilst it might be argued that personal taste has a large part to play in choosing a wine, there are many wine buyers who appreciate a few pointers in helping to choose a bottle that’s going to be enjoyable and good value for money. The numerical scales are now so firmly entrenched in the most influential wine and spirit markets around the world that they’re demanded by consumers wanting to reduce their risk of purchase. Even critics acknowledge that the numerical scoring has helped to elevate the overall quality of wine, and experts say it has also influenced the popularity of certain grapes (Cabernet, Shiraz , Chardonnay, etc) that producers select. You can be sure that any wine that scores in the mid-90s or above will be in such demand that it will sell out fast, and the subsequent vintage will probably sell at an increased price!
The numerical wine rating system has also been heavily criticized. It has been considered a driving force in the globalization of wine and the down playing of the influence of terroir and individuality in wine making. Critics of the wine rating system argue that the economic and marketing power of receiving favourable scores by influential critics has steered global winemaking towards producing a homogeneous style that is perceived as appealing to the critics. These critics point out that when a number of wines (particular red) are evaluated, those that have deep colours, full bodied, stronger, concentrated flavours and smooth mouthfeel tend to stand out more than wines that exhibit delicate characteristics. These wines tend to receive more favourable wine ratings which have led to an increase in the sales of these styles of wines on the market.
Proponents of non-numerical scoring systems appear to believe that subjectivity is inherent in all tasting and those claiming to be objective can be misleading the consumer. Tasting notes are considered preferable for a couple of reasons. First, it lets the taster review the wine’s attributes such as the aromas, the flavours, the tannins, the acidity, the colour, etc. and secondly to offer his or her recommendation including answers to questions on food pairing, how the wine developed during the meal or tasting session, if there was anything about the wine that was not agreeable, etc. None of those things can be answered by a numeric value slapped on a card placed next to a bottle of a shelf.
These proponents argue that whilst scoring of art or music on a 100-point scale is so obviously absurd that nobody does it, in the world of wine we are faced with a group of wine critics who labour ceaselessly to reduce wines – works of art in a glass – to two-digit numbers. What is worse, the consumer is actually influenced by this insanity. So instead of exploring the amazing diversity of expression in the wine world, consumers allow themselves to be manipulated by crude scores generated by the wine media. The commanding influence of the leading wine critics has biased the industry toward the production of massive, heavily extracted, over-oaked, high alcohol wines that lack finesse and balance. Wines that are momentarily gratifying get higher scores than those that are made to age gracefully. Wines that are rich, dense and heavily-extracted get higher scores than those which are made in a lighter, more food-friendly style. Expensive wines get higher scores than more moderately priced wines. These are all subjective preferences that have nothing to do with the quality of the wine. Yet the consumer is led by the critics into believing that their official scores are trustworthy indicators of a wine’s quality. The media does its best to reinforce this fiction.
Wine is too complex a beverage to be summed up in a single number. There are no objective criteria for differentiating between different wines. The way in which someone responds to a wine depends on a myriad of variables: stylistic preference, mood, the accompanying food and the state of the wine itself after shipping and storing and ageing – not to mention the prejudices and expectations that attend a wine’s reputation and price. However, wines are made and broken by numerical assessments. Poor reviews of a vintage will lower prices and retard sales. High praise will whip potential buyers into a feeding frenzy that drives prices to elevated heights. Therein lays the opportunity for money.
To prove an experiment in science, you must be able to replicate it. In the case of wine, this cannot be done. Our palate cannot consistently be precise and accurate. Our ability to smell and taste is human, and everyone has bad days and good days. There is a rich history of scientific research questioning whether wine experts can really make the fine taste distinctions they claim. It is scientifically proven that even flavour-trained professionals cannot reliably identify more than three or four components in a mixture, although wine critics regularly report tasting six or more. While there are some aspects to a wine that can be measured such as its residual sugar, optical density and acidity, these figures tell us relatively little about what the wine is actually like. Different individuals have unique palates and react differently to flavours in wine – particularly tannins and acids. Another example of the unreliability of wine judges tells a story of a winemaker who sent the same wine to a wine competition under three different labels. “Two of the identical samples were rejected,” he said, “one with the comment ‘undrinkable’.” The third bottle was awarded a double gold medal.
No system is perfect but a consensus of professionals is a good place to start. Wine ratings are not pointless, but needed to some extent. There is no perfect way to review wine, partially because it is such a subjective thing. Most disagreement in the discussion began around the value of numerical versus non-numerical scoring systems and ultimately refined to being about the objectivity or subjectivity of a system and thus its corresponding value to others who may read and/or use the score. It is arguably acceptable that the vast majority of people can separate wines in three broad categories namely “poor”, “average” and “good”. Beyond that, sorting wines into broad “poor”, “ok”, “better” and “best” categories should be quite possible.
Wine reviewers are, at the end of the day, just offering their opinions. No-one is right and no-one is wrong when it comes to voicing an opinion on a wine. What do the results mean? Basically, a wine scoring is one moment in time. In wine competitions, for example, the results reflect the collective opinions of expert judges about a wine on a particular day. Whilst it is arguable that many wine consumers benefit from a few pointers when it comes to choosing a bottle, there can really be no substitute for developing one’s own personal taste and preferences and learning to recognize the styles and types of wine that the consumer is likely to find personally enjoyable. Blind faith in any wine critic is not a good thing. It does not encourage the wine drinker to learn and discover for themselves.
For the moment there is no way to defeat the stranglehold the leading critics have on winemaking and wine marketing. In an ideal world, people would taste and think about wine sufficiently deeply to form their own opinions. But since that isn’t a natural process of our upbringing, it requires us to actively learn about wine: about varieties, countries, grapes, oak-ageing, vintages, producers, etc, etc, etc. In order to choose confidently as we stand in front of the supermarket shelf, we need knowledge. The only way to know your thoughts on the art (or wine in this case) is to experience it for yourself. This is simply because no-one else tastes the wine the way you taste the wine.
Drink what you want, when you want. Wine can be a very complicated subject, covering geology, climatology, plant biology, bio-chemistry, aesthetics, history, economics and sociology among other things, but in the end it comes down to a simple question: do I like what’s in my glass? If a wine critic helps you to say yes more often than no, he or she is doing a good job.
If a customer complains about the quality of a Monolithos wine, we take the complaint very seriously. We only offer wines that we would drink ourselves. Obviously, we hope you share our choice and taste, but if you don’t, we won’t take offence. For us, the importance of being able to communicate reliable information in order to recommend our products and keep customers coming back is paramount. In our experience, an increasingly educated public demand transparency and accountability rather than arbitrarily arrived-at ratings. Fortunately, like Monolithos Winery, an under-culture of small, artisan winemakers continues to thrive – people who make wine for the love and the art of it, rather than the scores. These are the wines worth exploring, experiencing, adopting into one’s lifestyle. They often get no attention in the media and no points from the critics.
Wine News and Information
* The holiday season is the time for big, rich meals, and two new studies concluded that drinking wine not only improves digestion but lowers the risk of belt-loosening afterwards. In research published online in the British Medical Journal, a team at the University Hospital of Zurich found that drinking white wine with a heavy meal of fondue lead to the cheese lingering in the stomach for longer. However, the negative side effects sometimes associated with slow digestion, mainly heartburn, were notably absent. According to Mark Fox (a gastroenterologist at the Queen’s Medical Centre in Nottingham ), a total of 20 individuals, ages 23 to 58, took part in the study. None reported problems with alcohol and all participants were trim. Half ate fondue with white wine, the other half with black tea. Afterwards, the researchers measured the rate of the food digestion for several hours. A week later they repeated the experiment, switching beverage choice. They found gastric emptying was significantly faster when fondue was consumed with tea rather than with wine, which is a good thing for the wine drinkers, Fox explained. “Having slow gastric emptying means the nutrients are being fed slowly into your system,” he said. “Your body will take up this energy very efficiently.” The study also found that if people consumed alcohol with meals, their appetites tended to shrink. That result correlates with another recent study that finds wine drinkers are less likely to gain weight than their peers.
* South African wine prices in the UK may go up this year when a trade agreement lapses with the European Union. The current treaty, which allows South Africa to avoid tariffs on up to 80% of its exports, has not been renewed despite negotiations between diplomats. This means South African wine entering the EU could soon attract tariffs ranging from 8.5% to 24%.
* Wine sales are growing more strongly in pubs and restaurants than they are in the off-trade, according to the latest quarterly report from the Wine & Spirit Trade Association. On-trade wine sales were up 3.5%, compared with 2.7% in shops, despite a fall in volumes. The data also shows the average price of a bottle of wine has gone up to £4.47. WSTA chief executive Jeremy Beadles said: “It’s encouraging to see wine delivering value in pubs and restaurants as well as in the off-trade, despite the reduction in volumes.”
* Consumers are increasingly prepared to spend more money on a bottle of wine to drink at home, according to latest research by Wine Intelligence. It seems penny-pinching in the wine aisle is in decline after two years of austerity reported. The report said there is good news for the on-trade too, with evidence showing an upturn in confidence in spend on wine for formal meals. The report also notes increasing consumer wine purchase visits to Sainsbury’s, the Co-Op and Marks & Spencer.
Monolithos Monthly News
The dormant period for most grapevines growing in Cyprus begins in mid-December and ends with bud break around end of February to mid-March. However, all depend on the winter temperatures which this last December remained relatively high (mostly over 10ºC). We are looking forward to a colder climate in January.
In the winery, last year’s wines are slowly going through the clarification, racking and blending process before cold stabilisation and bottling. Regarding the new winery building, the architectural plans have been finalised and are ready for submission to the town planning department. However, we are still held back by some bureaucratic obstacles attributed to the local authorities. Perhaps the words of Mahatma Gandhi are true in Monolithos’ case: “To lose patience is to lose the battle.”
Currently, all the 2009 wines are available for tasting and purchasing. If at any time you are passing near the village of Pachna and wish to visit the winery or purchase any of our products, Martin Wood will be pleased to meet and assist you at his “Fig Tree Villa” in Pachna, so do not hesitate to phone him at 25-816212 or 99-165995. We thank you for your continued support. Take care and remember the words of Victor Hugo:
“God made only water, but man made wine.”
From all of us here at Monolithos Winery we wish you:
A Happy, Healthy and Successful 2011!
No comments:
Post a Comment