RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores

CellarTracker Main Site

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Cellar Talk] >> General Discussion >> RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores - 7/24/2008 2:36:23 AM

pjaines

Posts: 930
Joined: 5/26/2008
From: London
Status: offline

To continue to paraphrase Shakespeare.....

If wine be the food of love, play on Duke Orsino: If wine be the food of love, play on, Give me excess of it; that surfeiting, The appetite may sicken, and so die.

_____________________________

-- Paul

(in reply to Serge Birbrair)

Post #: 31

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores - 7/24/2008 2:44:10 AM

Serge Birbrair

Posts: 1574
Joined: 4/23/2006
From: Boca Raton, Florida
Status: offline

Paul, sounds like 95-100+ to me
:)

_____________________________

Do you really think you understand terroir!? -

(in reply to pjaines)

Post #: 32

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores - 7/24/2008 3:34:24 AM

nwinther

Posts: 356
Joined: 7/28/2006
From: Denmark
Status: offline

Come on, Serge. Your tasting notes rarely just says "Buy More Now", or "Don't Buy". If that was the case, you could just as well substitute by a 3, 4 or 5 number system.

_____________________________

What I lack in size I make up for in obnoxiousness.

(in reply to Serge Birbrair)

Post #: 33

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores - 7/24/2008 3:39:40 AM

Serge Birbrair

Posts: 1574
Joined: 4/23/2006
From: Boca Raton, Florida
Status: offline

N, my tasting notes of late never contain any scores, but if they did, I say 3-4 system would suit me fine. 5 - no, more than I needed.
:)

You brought the argument and I'll bring the argument:
what exactly is the difference between 89 points and 90 points taste/impression wise?

We all know that 90 pointers and up are much easier sell for the stores than 89 and down,
so,
can YOU or any drinker you know,
can determine this mysterious difference and confirm it blind?

_____________________________

Do you really think you understand terroir!? -

(in reply to nwinther)

Post #: 34

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores - 7/24/2008 8:42:38 AM

fingers

Posts: 746
Joined: 8/26/2006
From: Santa Ana, CA
Status: offline

Hash and rehash, it's our favorite subject. But actually, Serge, I can differentiate from one point to the next by following a pragmatic scoring technique. As flawed as the Parker system is, it still provides a way to judge the 4 main characteristics: appearance, aroma, flavor, finish. I know, there are many variations (20pt/100pt, 4-5 star, ageability v. finish,etc) but it's what was taught to me in class so that's what I use. The difference between 89 and 90? Could just be a little cloudiness so it only gets 4 out of 5. Does that affect the decision to buy or drink? Hell no. But I do agree with your pedigree assesment - it's irrelevant and you've just ruined blind objectivity by considering such. If we tasted everything fully blind (no knowledge of type, varietal, or producer/region) all we are left with is our true impression of the how much do we really enjoy and like what we're drinking. I wouldn't mind if that were the only critereon, either

Frankly, I would prefer a 30 point system since I would never score anything below 70 points anyway without considering it flawed or undrinkable. I mean, how could you give a score of 1 for appearance (has mud and debris?), or 2 for aroma (sheep dung?), or a 3 for flavor (at least it has lots of oak?) and another 2 for finish (acidic gasoline notes?). Well, it still gets a 58!

< Message edited by fingers -- 7/24/2008 8:56:09 AM >

_____________________________

"A glass of wine is great refreshment after a hard days work."

Ludwig Van Beethoven

(in reply to Serge Birbrair)

Post #: 35

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores - 7/24/2008 8:57:45 AM

Serge Birbrair

Posts: 1574
Joined: 4/23/2006
From: Boca Raton, Florida
Status: offline

Fingers, NOW I feel sorry I won't meet you in Seattle. One of those days we'll have the blind tasting of 89-90 points wines and we'll see how good we'll be able to differentiate them. This should be fun exersize in our sensory.

_____________________________

Do you really think you understand terroir!? -

(in reply to fingers)

Post #: 36

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores - 7/24/2008 9:15:38 AM

fingers

Posts: 746
Joined: 8/26/2006
From: Santa Ana, CA
Status: offline

Easy, Serge. The 90pt one will be the one we like better. What else can you say? Screw all that color/aroma/flavor stuff and we're still just as happy!

The one thing I do appreciate about the component scoring is that it allows you to see what about this wine did that reviewer find most appealing/dissappointing. If their perception seems truthful to me, I get an idea of what to expect before I buy (i.e: little nose/great flavor, great nose and finish but lacking on the palate somewhat, etc). Flowery descriptions don't win me over, but when one assigns their score to a component, I figure that's where you get the real value of how much they enjoyed it. Problem is, I don't think anyone else does this but me!

I'm sorry we won't meet in Seattle, either. I thought we were going to swap assets!

< Message edited by fingers -- 7/24/2008 9:16:46 AM >

(in reply to Serge Birbrair)

Post #: 37

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores - 7/24/2008 9:26:27 AM

Serge Birbrair

Posts: 1574
Joined: 4/23/2006
From: Boca Raton, Florida
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: fingers
I thought we were going to swap assets!

hahahahhaha!!!

I had them on my mind when I was posting, they can prove to be indispensable in serving our pointers blind, but, as often happens now, I refrained from posting about them.
:)

To those who don't know the private joke about our assets -
"Search this board and you shall find"
:)

_____________________________

Do you really think you understand terroir!? -

(in reply to fingers)

Post #: 38

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores - 7/24/2008 9:31:55 AM

fingers

Posts: 746
Joined: 8/26/2006
From: Santa Ana, CA
Status: offline

That's okay - I'll just have to find another surprise for her that weekend.

(in reply to Serge Birbrair)

Post #: 39

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores - 7/24/2008 10:53:41 AM

nwinther

Posts: 356
Joined: 7/28/2006
From: Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Serge Birbrair

N, my tasting notes of late never contain any scores, but if they did, I say 3-4 system would suit me fine. 5 - no, more than I needed.
:)

You brought the argument and I'll bring the argument:
what exactly is the difference between 89 points and 90 points taste/impression wise?

We all know that 90 pointers and up are much easier sell for the stores than 89 and down,
so,
can YOU or any drinker you know,
can determine this mysterious difference and confirm it blind?

The difference between 89 and 90 can be many things, so there's no "exactly" to be found. But few if anybody will be able to tell the difference between two wines rated 89 and 90 BY ANOTHER PERSON. However, I can distinguish between MY ratings, so to speak. Wine is subjective and I rate my wine accordingly. I don't think I've ever chosen a wine over a single point difference (especially someone elses rating). But if that's the problem, one could just rate like this: 88-91, 89-92 etc. Then the allure of exact science is removed. (However, 89-92 quickly just becomes 92 in retailers material).

Besides, what I meant in my previous post is, that your TNs would contain nothing except the sentence "Buy more" or "give away", as that's the only thing that matters (apparantly).

_____________________________

What I lack in size I make up for in obnoxiousness.

(in reply to Serge Birbrair)

Post #: 40

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores - 7/24/2008 11:03:51 AM

nwinther

Posts: 356
Joined: 7/28/2006
From: Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: fingers

But I do agree with your pedigree assesment - it's irrelevant and you've just ruined blind objectivity by considering such. If we tasted everything fully blind (no knowledge of type, varietal, or producer/region) all we are left with is our true impression of the how much do we really enjoy and like what we're drinking. I wouldn't mind if that were the only critereon, either

But fingers, I don't buy my wine based on tasting them first. I buy on reputation (what I view as pedigree) and other peoples tasting notes (Incl. scores). If you didn't, what in the world would you want with tasting notes? They'd be completely irrelevant, as it's only, repeat only, your tasting experience that counts in your decision. When I buy wine online, I've rarely tasted it. I rely on other peoples TN's and a wines pedigree. Otherwise I'd never be able to buy wine online and I'd have to go to the paupers house due to freight-cost alone.

Of course, only MY taste can decide if I like it when it really counts.

_____________________________

What I lack in size I make up for in obnoxiousness.

(in reply to fingers)

Post #: 41

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores - 7/24/2008 11:16:18 AM

fingers

Posts: 746
Joined: 8/26/2006
From: Santa Ana, CA
Status: offline

Nik - that was all in reference to TN scoring, not buying. We're all at the mercy of others when we have no personal experience.

(in reply to nwinther)

Post #: 42

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores - 7/24/2008 11:16:56 AM

Serge Birbrair

Posts: 1574
Joined: 4/23/2006
From: Boca Raton, Florida
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: nwinther

Besides, what I meant in my previous post is, that your TNs would contain nothing except the sentence "Buy more" or "give away", as that's the only thing that matters (apparantly).

..and hold for more aging or drink, it's getting old...something your points can hardly convey
:)

When it comes to aged wine,
everybody are more interested in status of aging than the scores.

_____________________________

Do you really think you understand terroir!? -

(in reply to nwinther)

Post #: 43

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores - 7/24/2008 11:44:37 AM

nwinther

Posts: 356
Joined: 7/28/2006
From: Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Serge Birbrair

quote:

ORIGINAL: nwinther

Besides, what I meant in my previous post is, that your TNs would contain nothing except the sentence "Buy more" or "give away", as that's the only thing that matters (apparantly).

..and hold for more aging or drink, it's getting old...something your points can hardly convey
:)

When it comes to aged wine,
everybody are more interested in status of aging than the scores.

I've NEVER said, that points could stand alone. I claim they can add perspective to a TN and can be used to catch my attention.

_____________________________

What I lack in size I make up for in obnoxiousness.

(in reply to Serge Birbrair)

Post #: 44

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores - 7/24/2008 11:57:37 AM

Serge Birbrair

Posts: 1574
Joined: 4/23/2006
From: Boca Raton, Florida
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: nwinther

quote:

ORIGINAL: Serge Birbrair

quote:

ORIGINAL: nwinther

Besides, what I meant in my previous post is, that your TNs would contain nothing except the sentence "Buy more" or "give away", as that's the only thing that matters (apparantly).

..and hold for more aging or drink, it's getting old...something your points can hardly convey
:)

When it comes to aged wine,
everybody are more interested in status of aging than the scores.

I've NEVER said, that points could stand alone. I claim they can add perspective to a TN and can be used to catch my attention.

I hear you...just like a colorful label on the bottle of Mouton Rothschild, or list of grapes used on the bottle of Red Burgundy.
Both can add perspective, but absolutely unnecessary :)

_____________________________

Do you really think you understand terroir!? -

(in reply to nwinther)

Post #: 45

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores - 7/24/2008 12:11:01 PM

grafstrb

Posts: 513
Joined: 11/6/2007
From: Los Angeles, via Minnesota
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: fingers

Easy, Serge. The 90pt one will be the one we like better. What else can you say? Screw all that color/aroma/flavor stuff and we're still just as happy!

The one thing I do appreciate about the component scoring is that it allows you to see what about this wine did that reviewer find most appealing/dissappointing. If their perception seems truthful to me, I get an idea of what to expect before I buy (i.e: little nose/great flavor, great nose and finish but lacking on the palate somewhat, etc). Flowery descriptions don't win me over, but when one assigns their score to a component, I figure that's where you get the real value of how much they enjoyed it. Problem is, I don't think anyone else does this but me!

Ditto everything you said...which is why I do break my scores down into components. I also feel the component scoring keeps me more consistent and more objective than "gut impression" scoring does.

(in reply to fingers)

Post #: 46

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores - 7/24/2008 12:20:12 PM

fingers

Posts: 746
Joined: 8/26/2006
From: Santa Ana, CA
Status: offline

Exactly why your one of my fav's, graf

(in reply to grafstrb)

Post #: 47

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores - 7/24/2008 12:46:53 PM

grafstrb

Posts: 513
Joined: 11/6/2007
From: Los Angeles, via Minnesota
Status: offline

ah...indeed...it's been so long since I looked at that I feature here...it looks like a couple more people found some sort of inkling of value in my TN's since I last checked

(in reply to fingers)

Post #: 48

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores - 7/25/2008 1:00:18 AM

pjaines

Posts: 930
Joined: 5/26/2008
From: London
Status: offline

Graf, good tasting notes - I had a look after they were mentioned here.

Question. Can you explain the individual components of the scores please. In understand the 50 compenent, but what about the others. I had a quick look on the internet but there seem to be a number of systems out there.

Any info appreciated.

Cheers

_____________________________

-- Paul

(in reply to grafstrb)

Post #: 49

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores - 7/25/2008 1:59:56 AM

Maestro

Posts: 564
Joined: 10/4/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: pjaines

Graf, good tasting notes - I had a look after they were mentioned here.

Question. Can you explain the individual components of the scores please. In understand the 50 compenent, but what about the others. I had a quick look on the internet but there seem to be a number of systems out there.

Any info appreciated.

Cheers

This is the "official Parker" variation of the breakdown:

In terms of awarding points, my scoring system gives every wine a base of 50 points. The wine's general color and appearance merit up to 5 points. Since most wines today are well made, thanks to modern technology and the increased use of professional oenologists, they tend to receive at least 4, often 5 points. The aroma and bouquet merit up to 15 points, depending on the intensity level and dimension of the aroma and bouquet as well as the cleanliness of the wine. The flavor and finish merit up to 20 points, and again, intensity of flavor, balance, cleanliness, and depth and length on the palate are all important considerations when giving out points. Finally, the overall quality level or potential for further evolution and improvement—aging—merits up to 10 points.

But there are other breakdown approaches. I, for example, do not award points for ageability, because my belief is that the function of CT notes is to inform others how well a wine is drinking on the date of the TN.

I therefore use this simpler version: " The wine always starts at 50 points regardless, then you add up to 5 points for color, 10 for nose, 15 for taste, 10 for finish, and 10 for overall impression."

There is also the John Gilman approach, where it looks like he does not grant the baseline 50 points to the wine (rendering the scale an actual 100-point scale and not a 50-point one), as you can see for example in this review of a Mollydooker wine, in which he scores the wine 45 points.

I don't have the habit of posting the broken down score (i.e., "50+5+8+12+8+7=90"), but maybe I should...

< Message edited by Maestro -- 7/25/2008 2:51:01 AM >

(in reply to pjaines)

Post #: 50

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores - 7/25/2008 8:36:02 AM

nwinther

Posts: 356
Joined: 7/28/2006
From: Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Serge Birbrair

quote:

ORIGINAL: nwinther

quote:

ORIGINAL: Serge Birbrair

quote:

ORIGINAL: nwinther

Besides, what I meant in my previous post is, that your TNs would contain nothing except the sentence "Buy more" or "give away", as that's the only thing that matters (apparantly).

..and hold for more aging or drink, it's getting old...something your points can hardly convey
:)

When it comes to aged wine,
everybody are more interested in status of aging than the scores.

I've NEVER said, that points could stand alone. I claim they can add perspective to a TN and can be used to catch my attention.

I hear you...just like a colorful label on the bottle of Mouton Rothschild, or list of grapes used on the bottle of Red Burgundy.
Both can add perspective, but absolutely unnecessary :)

I completely disagree. I can't see any way those two examples are analogous to adding a score to a TN.

_____________________________

What I lack in size I make up for in obnoxiousness.

(in reply to Serge Birbrair)

Post #: 51

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores - 7/25/2008 8:48:33 AM

Serge Birbrair

Posts: 1574
Joined: 4/23/2006
From: Boca Raton, Florida
Status: offline

NW, I don't mind to disagree and STILL respect you in the morning, cheers!
;)

_____________________________

Do you really think you understand terroir!? -

(in reply to nwinther)

Post #: 52

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores - 7/25/2008 8:52:39 AM

smahk

Posts: 72
Joined: 2/23/2007
From: Long Island, NY
Status: offline

quote:

I, for example, do not award points for ageability, because my belief is that the function of CT notes is to inform others how well a wine is drinking on the date of the TN.

I'm glad you added that - because I an such a neophyte that I couldn't even begin to guess how a wine would age. My only bench mark for aging would be if it were to tannic to drink now - I would WANT to hold it for much later.

I think too, that now I will try to provide a breakout - it would be good to look back, as a historical perspective to see what exactly I liked ( or disliked) about a wine to merit an exact score.

(in reply to nwinther)

Post #: 53

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores - 7/25/2008 11:39:21 AM

nwinther

Posts: 356
Joined: 7/28/2006
From: Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: smahk

quote:

I, for example, do not award points for ageability, because my belief is that the function of CT notes is to inform others how well a wine is drinking on the date of the TN.

I'm glad you added that - because I an such a neophyte that I couldn't even begin to guess how a wine would age. My only bench mark for aging would be if it were to tannic to drink now - I would WANT to hold it for much later.

I think too, that now I will try to provide a breakout - it would be good to look back, as a historical perspective to see what exactly I liked ( or disliked) about a wine to merit an exact score.

Your post says it's a reply to a post of mine, but you're quoting Maestro.

However, I agree. Ageability-scoring would be difficult in a "fixed" point-system like Parkers. If a wine could be granted a point for ageability, a lot of wines could, by definition not score more than 99, as the wine, sooner or later, will reach it's peak and begin its decline. It means that the wine has lost ist ageability and can not be awarded the point accordingly.To add insult to injury, this would be a point in the wines life, where it's never been better. (So tasted last year, it would be able to age for another year and add complexety and could be granted another point (in theory 100) but when it actually reaches that "better stage" it LOOSES a point).

_____________________________

What I lack in size I make up for in obnoxiousness.

(in reply to smahk)

Post #: 54

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores - 7/25/2008 11:57:09 AM

grafstrb

Posts: 513
Joined: 11/6/2007
From: Los Angeles, via Minnesota
Status: offline

Paul,

Thank you for the kind comments. Although my CT notes very closely mirror the TN's I write down in my wine journal while tasting, I do try to flesh them out a bit for CT consumption, so they're not 100% boring (I think I've already improved to only 97% boring!

) I try to write objective, honest, and consistent notes, and I feel they serve their purpose if even one person finds them helpful (and since I find them helpful, they serve their purpose

).

I use the following scoring system when I'm evaluating a wine:

50 points off the bat, just for showing up
5 points for color/appearance -- (in my TN's I call this "Body," and I usually describe a wine's body, color, depth of color, and the presence of any sediment and/or fine particulate matter)
15 points for nose/aroma
20 points for taste, finish, and mouthfeel
10 points for ability to improve with age/overall impression -- in response to some of the other comments re: this category: sometimes I feel a young wine will "get better with age," and I'll give it a point or two in this regard...later on, after aging, these "get better with age points" are lost, but if it actually did improve with age these points merely get shifted to my "overall impression" points, which I lump-in with the "get better with age" points...this way, a wine doesn't "lose" points as it "gets better with age."

-grafs
(glad some of you have taken to calling me this, as it actually is one my nicknames)

< Message edited by grafstrb -- 7/25/2008 12:12:26 PM >

(in reply to pjaines)

Post #: 55

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores - 7/26/2008 9:46:25 AM

NiklasW

Posts: 510
Joined: 10/13/2007
From: Finland
Status: offline

One thing nobody has brought up, we are in fact stuck with the 100 point system, whether we like it or not on CT. I would prefer a 10 point system, and I don't really understand why there should be 50 points "for just showing up", but what can you do? And as I've said before, the points are for me, so that I can sort by them to see what I liked over time. Fun thing to do at this point of the wine tasting career! Maybe in 20-30 years I won't care anymore...

(in reply to grafstrb)

Post #: 56

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores - 8/3/2008 6:00:01 PM

nazizin

Posts: 10
Joined: 8/2/2008
Status: offline

Just being the devil's advocate here, but doesn't the proverbial "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" (or in other words "bliss is in the tongue of the taster") trump many descriptions/scores?

(in reply to NiklasW)

Post #: 57

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores - 8/3/2008 8:45:11 PM

fingers

Posts: 746
Joined: 8/26/2006
From: Santa Ana, CA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: nazizin

Just being the devil's advocate here, but doesn't the proverbial "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" (or in other words "bliss is in the tongue of the taster") trump many descriptions/scores?

Amen, Brother (or Sister)

(in reply to nazizin)

Post #: 58

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores - 8/3/2008 8:55:57 PM

Serge Birbrair

Posts: 1574
Joined: 4/23/2006
From: Boca Raton, Florida
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: fingers

quote:

ORIGINAL: nazizin

Just being the devil's advocate here, but doesn't the proverbial "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" (or in other words "bliss is in the tongue of the taster") trump many descriptions/scores?

Amen, Brother (or Sister)

ditto

_____________________________

Do you really think you understand terroir!? -

(in reply to fingers)

Post #: 59

RE: The Wisdom of Descriptions vs Scores - 8/4/2008 1:18:38 AM

nwinther

Posts: 356
Joined: 7/28/2006
From: Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NiklasW

One thing nobody has brought up, we are in fact stuck with the 100 point system, whether we like it or not on CT. I would prefer a 10 point system, and I don't really understand why there should be 50 points "for just showing up", but what can you do? And as I've said before, the points are for me, so that I can sort by them to see what I liked over time. Fun thing to do at this point of the wine tasting career! Maybe in 20-30 years I won't care anymore...

I guess it's something to do with the percieves precision in 100 points. If you give a wine 80 points, I suppose people in here (if they were forced to apply a number using the Parker system) would say it's a prette poor wine. However, if they give it 89, is a pretty darn good wine. If you give a wine 8 points, this is analogous to both 80 and 89 points.

However, this presumes that you never score below 5 or six points. If you actually give out 1 point on a regular basis (assuming it's the equivalent to 60 or so P-points), the 8 would be a very good wine, whereas 3-4 would be a wine of average quality.

However, I rarely see a system that uses it's entire range. Decanter does it in its star-system, but fails to do so in its 20-point system. Hugh Johnson uses the entire range in his 4-star system (wine pocket book).

_____________________________

What I lack in size I make up for in obnoxiousness.

(in reply to NiklasW)

Post #: 60